Loading...
City Council Packet - 12/16/2003 AD # COMMUNITY! NEWSPAPERS Legal P.O. BOX 370 PHONE (503)684-0360 Notice TT 10335 BEAVERTON, OREGON 97075 Legal - '2 - - Notice of Receipt of Ballot Title NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a ballot title for a meas&"~ City of Tigard referred by the City of Tigard was filed with the City Elections Officer of Tigard on December 16, 2003, to be placed on the March ,1312 5 SW Hall Blvd. 9, 2004, ballot for Tigard voters and voters within the area proposed for annexation. The proposed ballot measure caption is as follows: Tigard,Oregon 97223 CAPTION , A measure expanding the Tigard City limits by phased annexation. Accounts Payable An Explanatory Statement, which will be submitted to the Washington County Elections Division for publication in the March 9, 2004, County Voters Pamphlet is on file with the City Recorder. Pursuant to Tigard Municipal Code Section 1.12.030, an elector AFFIDAVIT OF PUE dissatisfied with the ballot title may file a petition with the City Elections Officer, no later than 5 p.m. on December 26, 2003, for STATE OF OREGON, SS review of the ballot title by the Council. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON,) For further information, contact City Recorder/Elections Officer Cathy Wheatley at Cathy@ei.tigard.orus or 503-639-4171, Ext. I, Kathy Snyder 2410. being first duly sworn, depose and say that TT 10335 - Publish December 18, 2003. Director, or his principal clerk, of th-3 Barr - a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard _in the aforesaid county and state; that the Notice of Receipt of Ballot Title/Expand City T.;mits a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and consecutive in the following issues: December 18,2003 Subscribed and sworn be re me this l6th clay of nP~Pmber, 2003 u OFFICIAL SEAL 0 ROBIN A BURGESS otary Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 344589 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 18, 2005 My Commission Expires: ^ M AV! :sejid-A3 1,1101691wwo0 AN . 900Z'9t Avw sadid~a tJ01SSiww00 tiW a~O ~o} o!ignd tUe;o 61j os -ON NOISSIWWOO uoB Pug eQuosgnS P 1,1003ao-01~8ftd ALiH10N 7."c7lujow S SS3Jasiy; aw atans jtf101j00 £OOZ' Yaqui 77 81 xagluaoaQ £OOZ eni;noesuoo :sanssi 6u►nn0110} ay; ui jo; jededsn+eu Pigs }o anssi a~i;ua si yoiyN► }o Rdoa e Pug enisseoans aZQO eaay nd sBM 'Pa'A8UUe O; O ys!Iq o as }e ay; ul pa ti s A;unoo p: s P .71, a '41 181s P p u$1•igno edudsnAa s pTs yl ale o~ ay; ui ap se Uoi;sinaiio Isiaua5 } JO 'Jo;oaaiCt %.11 ut S80 'ft Paull 141, o ')j,aio isdiruild sin lsji} 6uiaq 61 j des pus asodap uaoMS uis u~s•yI 'i se dUisi;~anP'V eyl w8 a .zaP ('NOLe)N'Noe3ti0 40N31VIS Nal`d:)tl9nd 4011A`+~41~~d ' atgvked s~ nooa £ZZL6 U06aa0'px'ebTs • -pnZS -[Y'sH MS SZT£Z• a;soi)dnc3 ❑ • o iMeP!}►~ paebZ,, 1 ea s~ea~, ❑ • eoi;oN ; y 6UisE%a6npd ao!;ON ITS661 Jnveuun oy, uir anam vo c, n/ R NOOBUO 'N011~~~ bX08 'O'd TtGARD(43)-NewmanlS,McClelland FORESTGROVE (52) -Alna 16, L.INrjWW03 Sexton 8, Knowlton 5, Walters-Alexander ` , ~t Cj' 12, Watkins 7, Mollaghaffari 4, Bachofner 5, Kline 4, Gamble 3, Ingram 3, C. Sexton 2, Kames 2, Guyton 1, Cedarberg, Kurtz, 3, Stauber 3, Gustafson 2, Cooper, Skidmore. Hawkins, McDowell. TUALATIN (56) - Berggren 23, Murphy TiGARD (88) - Hunt 23, Cameron 9, 10, Myers 6. Dwight 6, Messenger 4, Roth Foster 9, Modica 9, Jorgensen 7, Hetlage 4, Pirtle 3, Hughes, Knudsen, Luty. 4, Grubaugh 2, Myers 2, Day 1, Hansen, Lucas, So. Shelton, Br. Shelton, Robbins. Tigard 12 12 5 14-43 Tualatin 4 10 16 27-68 Forest Grove 18 . 8-1111 1"2 Thursday, Dec. 18 games: Tigard 20 23 14 9-88 Canby at Tigard, 7:15 p.m. Friday, Dec. 12 results: Newberg at Tualatin, 7:15 p.m. Tualatin 101, Woodburn 30 Saturday, Dec. 20 games: Silverton 51, McMinnville 36 Tigard at Oregon City, 7:30 p.m. Putnam 51, Canby 35 Monday, Dec. 22 games: Tualatin vs. Gresham at Lakeridge tourney, TUALATIN (101) - L. Mangle 22, Hein 9:30 a.m. 14, DePaepe 12, Lindquist 11, McBride 8, Tuesday, Dec. 23 games: Chaput 7, H. Mangle 6, Danlison 6, Tualatin at Lakaridge tourney, TBA Bateman 4, Razavi 4, Mandazona 2, Folles i r I...Lr\•LI 11 VI\, VIIL~.IVI\ JIVI./ Legal Notice Advertising Laity of Tigard CITY OF TIGARD 3125 SW Hall Blvd. igard,Oregon 97223 d OREGON Accounts Payable Notice of Public Hearing for Local Law Enforcement Block Grant NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the Tigard City Council on 12-16-03 at 7:30 p.m., Tigard City Hall. AFFIDAVIT OF p Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon. The purpose of the hearing is to inform the public about the Local Law STATE OF OREGON, ) Enforcement Block Grant the Police Department received from the COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, ) Department of Justice. For further information, contact City Recorder Cathy Wheatley at 1, Kathy Snyder cathy@ci.tigard.orus or (503) 639-4171, Ext. 2410. being first duly sworn, depose and sa th, TT 10332 - Publish December 11, 2003. Director, or his principal clerk, of the T1ggL u-xgq -Let t-Lii LliltC5 a newspaper of general circulation as ddefined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard in the aforesaid county and st te; that the Public HearingzPolice Del2t.Block Grant a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and consecutive in the following issues: December 11,2003 Subscribed and sworn to bef me this llt day of December, 2003 0 OFFICIAL SEAL ROBIN A BURGESS ary Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 344589 MY My Commission Expires: COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 18, 2005 „ prrourpa4 M11111111111111 ~ e ref se el ;Jojjpa aI eas [~lun Jano aq 1, UDAA lamas 2 suleu Peorq I un P b Pas ~1 1 sa9a ~[e pue `Hogs d~K of sado ~a1 quruur.K'agl -uroJ lsa,~guo s1g1 uI 211119d PaIURJ g nisn~ogile~ Sfe 1'9 do at, N ag1 PunoJe 14% spun A n~1H 'aunt U ~M o~feld aglr - 'as►Jard as °u aa$SHS sy~ 0-9 lsrr g8r.H„ agI aqua IIegO 0ni3 agl yllm Z ~e arq o1 Mogs Ieu 1 UO uaxel se s IIeyJ Jagloue 'sauoaurure u12 aq s#1ofeld '49"1 PJeBr g luapnus loo J le War agl uro 1, uaJa .L 3o dnW e , g S ~aP sureal ~J uropuej sallrnl q$noua r[lIM quofuoJS- 1d j Oj , o Jxa U ~u~IclrJr u p V s~p~~ surr;al qu Id ag1 o pea Poogq 'u ud _11D do P113 ap 1b'l'Pouad4l 'un adbJI.L Jsnr,p r [al~Je NVWa3H3 saWi1ayl}O >:Id H aloorN '[4snno,O19 8 Jia i/. Ied OUAeM lsou Legal Notice Advertising • ❑ Tearsheet Notice nity of Tigard 3125 SW Hall Blvd. igard , Oregon 9 7 2 2 3 • 13 Duplicate Affidavit accounts Payable • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF OREGON, ) COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, I,Kathy Snyder being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am tho Advertisin Director, or his principal clerk, of the Ticrard-Tualatin 919imes a newspaper of general circulation as defined in ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Tigard in the aforesaid county and st te; that the Public Henri ngz.Police Dept.Block Grant a printed copy of which is hereto annexed, was published in the entire issue of said newspaper for ONE successive and consecutive in the following issues: December 11,2003 Subscribed and sworn to bef me this llt day of December, 2003 OFFICIAL SEAL ROBIN A BURGESS OYary Public for Oregon NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO. 344589 My Commission Expires: MY COMIAISSION EXPIRES MAY 16.2W5 AICCIDJVIT ~s CITY OF TIGARD OREGON TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 16, 2003 COUNCIL MEETING WILL BE TELEVISED 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503) 684-2772 1~ ~ ~ 1~ ~ ~ 1~ i Agenda Item No. S Meeting of I. 13 . o COUNCIL MINUTES TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 16, 2003 The meeting was called to order at 6:28 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen. • STUDY SESSION > ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS • City Manager Monahan detailed revisions to the agenda. • Mr. Monahan noted two members of the Library Board would testify on the visitor's agenda regarding the board's support of the library policies to be considered on the consent agenda. • Mr. Monahan asked the Council what it would like to do with two pieces of written testimony on Bull Mountain annexation received after the noon, December 11, 2003 deadline. Councilor Moore asserted the Council should not make exceptions to the deadline. After brief discussion, Council consensus was they may read and consider the testimony, but it would not become part of the record. > QUARTERLY MEETING - BUDGET COMMITTEE Budget Committee members in attendance: Forrest Nabors, Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen, Councilors Moore, Sherwood and Wilson, and Mark Mahon (alternate). Finance Director Prosser stated the city was beginning its internal budget process. He presented three bar graph displays, depicting various budget scenarios. The initial graph, from the end of the budget process last year, shotus the city shortfall at $1.2 million in FY 2007-08. The second graph, an "unedited" forecast of what city departments are requesting over the next five years, shows a city shortfall of $3 million in FY 2006-07. The earlier and more drastic shortfall stems from a request for 39 additional staff positions; 26 of which are requested in FY 2004-05. The final graph, an "edited" forecast, shows a city shortfall of $1 million in 2007-08. In this version, most of the new positions requested in the second graph were eliminated. Only a few of the positions requested in graph two Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 1 remain, and the majority of these are tied to staffing the new library. Budget cuts made this year, primarily related to training, were not restored. All departments feel their training budgets are not adequate. Potential revenues from the Bull Mountain annexation were not factored into the graphs. Mr. Prosser described the highlights of two handouts entitled "Budget Strategies/Guidelines" and "City of Tigard FY 2004-05 Budget Calendar." Mr. Prosser asked the Council how they would like to approach advertising of social service and community sponsored events funding. In the past, the Budget Committee set a target of .5% of the operating budget allocated to such grants. This formula would result in $135,600 this year. Last year's total was $134,700, with actual funding at about $125,000. The advertising approach selected should take into account the level of available funding. The criteria and guidelines for awarding the grants were discussed briefly. It was noted the grant funds come directly from the city's general fund. Councilor Moore suggested the committee go through the process of seeking applicants, but said the committee would not make promises about the availability of funds. Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen said he didn't think the city needed to seek out new applicants, and Councilor Moore agreed. Based upon the committee's discussion, Mr. Prosser asked if the committee wished to advertise the grant application process to those organizations and groups that had applied for funds in the past, even if they were not funded. Mr. Mahon expressed his support of this approach. By not soliciting applications from a broader audience, Mr. Mahon stated this approach would be less likely to create false expectations about the availability of grant funds. It was decided the representative on the grant review subcommittee would be discussed when the Council reviews the liaison list later in the meeting. Mr. Nabors agreed to be the serve in Mr. Woodruff's place on the subcommittee, should Mr. Woodruff be unable to serve. Mr. Prosser reviewed the Budget Committee meeting calendar and timelines for the 2004-05 budget. He noted the committee may need to have an additional meeting on May 24, 2004 should the WCCLS levy fail. > PARK RESERVATION UPDATE - INITIATING AN ON-LINE PARKS RESERVATION SERVICE Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 2 6m Assistant Public Works Director Koellermeler and Parks Manager Plaza asked for Council direction on implementing an online parks reservation system. Mr. Plaza presented a PowerPoint presentation which is on file in the City Recorder's office. Council consensus was to proceed with the online park reservation system and the Council raised no objections to offering a five dollar discount to those using the reservation system in the first year. > ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS • Documents relating to the Bull Mountain annexation were discussed: - City Attorney Ramis summarized the December 12, 2003 memos from his office regarding Tigard/Bull Mountain and Urban Service Provider Annexation. - A "Resolution of Intent" was distributed and discussed for possible consideration at tonight's meeting. - The memo regarding possible White Paper Task Forces was discussed. Sample task force areas of focus included in the memo were streets, parks and sheriff/police services. City Manager Monahan suggested other possible task forces might concentrate on: ■ comprehensive planning ■ water facilities and the future of the Tigard Water District ■ streetlights • a comparison of city and county services Councilor Wilson asked what the goal of having task forces prepare white papers would be. He expressed concern this approach may lead participants to believe task force recommendations will be incorporated into the plan. Mr. Monahan stated the intent of creating the task forces was to generate a more realistic assessment of what will happen, not to _ modify the annexation plan. Councilor Wilson added he didn't want to be restricted to only addressing Bull Mountain issues and miss an opportunity to work on citywide problems. j Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen distributed the proposed motions. • Mr. Monahan proposed the discussion of Council Vacancy Option Review be addressed after the business meeting is concluded. j • Community Development Director Hendryx updated the Council on an issue with Bretton Woods. A demolition permit was issued to the developer. The connection between the demolition permit and the subdivision was not identified and the developer performed the demolition without proper erosion control and tree protection. A "stop work order" Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 3 was issued on the site. There was concern about contaminants on the site and the developer was authorized to remove an oil tank, pump water from the foundation and remediate contaminated soil, with the condition that full fencing and a tree preservation plan was in place for the disturbed area. The plan was reviewed by the City Arborist. No further action will occur on the site until the developer's arborist submits a detailed report on the damage to the existing trees. The City Arborist will review this report and the situation will be reevaluated. A penalty may be imposed. • Mr. Monahan proposed the discussion about the Urban Renewal Workshop be addressed after the business meeting is concluded. • Mr. Monahan noted Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen is scheduled to attend the coffee talk on December 18, 2003, but has a conflict. Councilor Sherwood offered to attend, and Councilor Wilson will be her back-up if she is unable to attend. The status of future coffee talks will be considered at a later time. • EXECUTIVE SESSION: No executive session was held. Council meeting recessed at 7:25 Council business meeting convened at 7:32 p.m. 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen called the meeting to order. 1.2 Roll Call: Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen, Councilors Moore, Sherwood and Wilson 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications 8Z Liaison Reports: None 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items City Manager Monahan noted there was a revised agenda with the following: Addition of Planning Commission Appointments Addition of Tree Board Appointments > Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen issued a proclamation and recognized the Tigard High School Football Team as 2003 State Champions 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 4 • Suzan Turley and ]an Thenell from the Library Board stated the library policies the Council would consider under agenda item 3.4 had been carefully reviewed by the board and the city attorney's office. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt the Consent Agenda as follows: 3.1 Approve Council Meeting Minutes: November 19, 2003 3.2 Approve the Dedication of a Portion of Right-of-Way Along Hall Boulevard to the Oregon Department of Transportation 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: a. Approve Changes to the Pavement Major Maintenance Program Contract with S-2 Contractors Inc. b. Approve Amendment to the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection Project Contract with DeHaas 81 Associates and Authorize Additional Amendments 3.4 Approve Proposed Library Policies and Procedures The motion was approved by a unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes 4. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) - BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN (ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003- 00003/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003-00004/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCAI 2003-00005/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCAI 2003-00006) ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2003-00003, 2003-00004, 2003- 00005,2003-00006 BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN REQUEST: The City of Tigard is proposing to annex 1,378 acres of Washington County known as Bull Mountain through the annexation plan process. State law allows the City to annex territory within an urban growth boundary (UGB) pursuant to a detailed annexation plan, subject to voter approval. If the Tigard City Council approves the annexation proposal, it would set a date for the proposal to be placed on the ballot. LOCATION: The unincorporated area is within the UGB. It is generally bounded on the north by Barrows Road, on the east by Tigard City limits, on the south by Beef Bend Road, and on the west partially by 150th Avenue and near Roy Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 5 Rogers-Road. For specific boundary, see vicinity map. ZONE: The area includes R- 4.5 (Low-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 7,500 square feet), R-7 (Medium-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 5,000 square feet), R-12 (Medium-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 3,050 square feet) and R- 25 (Medium High-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 1,480 square feet). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are set out in Community Development Code Chapter 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; ORS Chapters 195.205 and 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. a. Continue Public Hearing from December 2, 2003 b. Staff Report - presented on December 2, 2003 C. Public Testimony - concluded on December 2, 2003 d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen noted oral testimony had been concluded on December 2, 2003. Written testimony was accepted through noon on December 11, 2003, and had been received and reviewed by the Council. Councilor Moore commented it was apparent more homework needed to be done and additional information and input gathered. He proposed taking no action on the annexation plan. Councilor Wilson concurred, adding there were still concerns to be addressed and he supported delaying a decision pending more information. Councilor Sherwood also supported taking no action. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen, seconded by Councilor Moore, to take no action on the annexation plan as proposed, with the intent to revisit the issue after July 1, 2004, upon potential revision or addition to the annexation plan. p The motion was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen, seconded by Councilor Moore, to direct staff to form subcommittees, with this Council as the overall committee, for Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 6 the purpose of considering several issues surrounding the annexation plan, to include but not be limited to: - Parks - Police - Library - Planning - Capital Improvements - Street Maintenance The subcommittees will each consist of at least one member each from: 1. the appropriate department staff from the City of Tigard 2. their appropriate counterpart from Washington County 3. at least an equal number of private citizens to be chosen from those who are active in CP04B or CP04M, with at least one member each from the area of annexation and from the city limits of Tigard. Each subcommittee Is to be charged with considering their assigned issue and producing a white paper of recommendations to be attached to the annexation plan; that white paper to be completed and submitted to this Council on or before June 30, 2004. The Council would then review, make changes if necessary, and approve as an appendix to the annexation plan. Discussion Councilor Wilson clarified the subcommittees would gather information, but it was the Council's job to evaluate the information presented in the white papers and then prepare a final recommendation. The motion was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes Community Development Director Hendryx advised Council of the timeline for placing the ballot measure on the November 2004 ballot. This will impact the amount of time the Council has to review the white papers. Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen concluded this item. 5. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING ON A BALLOT MEASURE FOR THE MARCH 9, 2004 ELECTION FOR A MEASURE EXPANDING THE TIGARD CITY LIMITS BY PHASED ANNEXATION Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 7 a. Continue Public Hearing from December 2, 2003 b. Staff Report - presented on December 2, 2003 (combined with the Annexation Plan Public Hearing) C. Public Testimony - concluded on December 2, 2003 d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Wilson, to not take action on the resolution placing the annexation plan on the March 9, 2004 ballot. The motion was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen, seconded by Councilor Wilson, to pass a Resolution of Intent, stating that the city is committed to placing the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan on the November 2, 2004 ballot, pending the completion of the tasks discussed earlier. Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen added this would put the city in compliance with a county resolution, so park System Development Charges could be collected. Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen read the Resolution of Intent, Resolution No. 03-66, A RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING IN JULY, 2004 ON THE BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN AND PLACE THE BALLOT MEASURE BEFORE THE ELECTORATE IN NOVEMBER, 2004. The resolution was approved by unanimous vote: x Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes 6 Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes u r Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen concluded this item. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 8 6. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) - PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY STREET VACATION FOR 74 h AVENUE AT LANDAU STREET (VAC 2003-00001) The Tigard City Council considered the proposed vacation involving 3,241 square feet of public right-of-way that lies to the northwest of the SW 74" Avenue/Landau Street intersection. The reason for the vacation request is the Tigard Transportation System Plan indicates that SW 741 Avenue is to meet SW Landau Street at a 90 degree angle. To facilitate the realignment of SW 741 Avenue, the applicant has secured a right- of-way dedication agreement with the adjacent property owners to the east. With the successful vacation of the requested right-of-way, the subject square footage would be incorporated Into the proposed parcels of the recently submitted Weigela Terrace Subdivision; however, the proposed lots of the subdivision can meet minimum standards for the R-4.5 zoning and do not need the square footage that would be added to those lots upon approval of the requested vacation. The request was filed with the City on July 11, 2003 and initiated by the City Council at the request of the applicant on October 28, 2003. Community Development Director Hendryx presented the staff report and relayed that staff recommended approving the vacation. a. Open the Public Hearing Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen opened the public hearing. b. Declarations or Challenges Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen read the following: Do any members of Council wish to report any ex-parte contact or information gained outside the hearing including any site visits? Councilor Moore advised he was familiar with the intersection. Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? All members indicated they were familiar with the application. Are mere any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? There were no challenges. C. Public Testimony Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 9 Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen read the following: For all those wishing to testify, please be aware that failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the Council and parties an opportunity to respond to the issue will preclude an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals on this issue. Testimony and evidence must be directed toward the criteria described by staff or other criteria in the plan or land use regulation which you believe apply to the decision. There was no public testimony. d. Council Questions There was no discussion. e. Close Public Hearing Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen closed the public hearing. f. Council Consideration: Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to adopt Ordinance No. 03-11. Ordinance No. 03 - 11, AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE VACATION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 3;74! SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY BETTER KNOWN AS SW 74TH AVENUE WHICH LIES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SW 74TH AVENUE AND LANDAU STREET, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, (VAC2003-00001). The ordinance was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes 7. CONSIDER AN AGREEMENT GRANTING THE CITY MEMBERSHIP ON THE JOINT WATER COMMISSION (JWC) a. Staff Report Public Works Director Wegner and Assistant Public Works Director Koellermeier provided background information on this item. Mr. Koellermeier relayed King City, Durham and the Tigard Water Board all endorsed membership on the commission. Mr. Koellermeier explained the city would be Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 10 leasing water from another jurisdiction with water rights. Actual water rights may come in the future. The commission is not asking for a membership fee, and the cost of the water purchased will be less than the city is currently paying to the City of Portland. If the agreement is approved by the Council and subsequently the JWC, the city should be able to participate in the ]WC's April meeting. b. Council Discussion Councilor Moore added the agreement brings the city one step closer to owning a water source. Mr. Wegner advised signing this agreement did not prevent the city from pursuing other options. C. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to authorize the Mayor Pro Tem to sign the agreement granting the city membership to the Joint Water Commission. Mr. Wegner interjected that the exact wording of the agreement may be changed and asked the Council to grant the Mayor Pro Tem the authority to sign the agreement after it is finalized. City Attorney Ramis added if any of the changes were substantial, the agreement would be brought back to the Council. Amended motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to authorize the Mayor Pro Tem to sign the agreement after final changes are made. The motion was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes 15. NON-AGENDA items were considered at this time (out of sequence on the Agenda; Item No. 8 was considered after this item). Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen summarized and read the resolution appointing members to the Planning Commission. Council Consideration: Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to adopt Resolution No. 03-67. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 11 Resolution 03-67, A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL REAPPOINTING MARK PADGETT, AND APPOINTING REX CAFFALL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPOINTING KATHERINE MEADS AS THE ALTERNATE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. The resolution was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes Appointee Mark Padgett expressed his appreciation at being reappointed to the Planning Commission. He inquired whether the Planning Commission's alternate member was eligible to serve as a liaison for the commission. City Attorney Ramis said he would look into the matter. City Manager Monahan added the requirements of the committee upon which the liaison is to serve may specifically require a Planning Commission member. Councilor Moore acknowledged Mr. Padgett for his past leadership on the Planning Commission. Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen summarized the resolution appointing members to the Tree Board. Council Consideration: Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to adopt Resolution No. 03-68. Resolution 03-68, A RESOLUTION OF THE TIGARD CITY COUNCIL APPOINTING ROBERT CANCELOSI TO THE TREE BOARD AND APPOINTING JIM BRAY AS FIRST ALTER1,14ATE AND COLIN PENNO AS SECOND r ALTERNATE TO THE TREE BOARD. 0 The resolution was approved by unanimous vote: i s Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen - Yes a Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 12 x 8. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CITY OF TIGARD/TRIMET MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) a. Staff Report Community Development Director Hendryx provided background information on this item. He stated the MOU lays the foundation for further work with TriMet and identifies TriMet and city responsibilities in developing a cooperative agreement regarding expectations about service delivery and improvements. b. Council Discussion Councilor Moore stated the Council had been working to improve mass transit within the city for a long time and he was excited to see progress on this issue. Councilor Wilson asserted the agreement was "wimpy." He continued by saying that at a recent meeting, Mr. Hansen, TriMet General Manager, had not been completely forthright about federal problems with the commuter rail project. Councilor Wilson said TriMet's interest seems to focus on large capital projects, not bus service. He was expecting a stronger commitment than was documented in the agreement. Councilor Moore agreed with Councilor Wilson's assessment, but sugges*Pd the city si?,?uld approve the agreement beczase it would be a step in the right direction. a There was a brief discussion about rejecting the MOU. Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen commented the addition of the Local Area Plan lends some strength to the agreement. He stated the MOU represented an improvement in the city's relationship with TriMet. Councilor Sherwood concurred. C. Motion by Councilor Moore, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to approve the City of Tigard/TriMet Memorandum of Understanding and authorize the Mayor Pro Tem to sign it. The motion passed by a majority vote (one abstention): Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Abstained Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 13 9. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ACCEPTING THE 2003 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT AND APPROVING THE SPENDING OF FUNDS a. Open Public Hearing Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen opened the public hearing. b. Summation by Police Staff Police Chief Dickinson described the procedure required to qualify for these federal grant funds and explained how the money would be spent. Councilor Sherwood left the meeting. There was a brief discussion with the City Attorney and City Manager on whether and how to proceed in Councilor Sherwood's absence. The Council decided to continue. C. Public Testimony There was no public testimony. Councilor Sherwood returned to the meeting. d. Staff Recommendation Police Chief Dickinson recommended accepting the grant and authorizing the spending of funds. e. Motion by Councilor Moore to accept the grant and approve the spending of funds. fi Close Public Hearing Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen closed the public hearing. Councilor Wilson seconded Councilor Moore's motion. The motion was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 14 i0. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #12 TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 BUDGET TO ACCEPT AND EXPEND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS a. Staff Report Police Chief Dickinson stated this budget amendment would make the adjustment necessary to allow the city to accept the grant funds approved in item #9 and go forward with expenditures. b. Council Discussion There was no discussion. C. Council Consideration: Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Sherwood, to adopt Resolution No. 03-69. Resolution No. 03 - 69, A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #12 TO THE FY 2003-04 BUDGET TO ACCEPT AND EXPEND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS The resolution was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes 11. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11.08 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO BURGLARY AND ROBBERY ALARM SYSTEMS a. Staff Report Police Chlef Dickinson described some of the proposed changes to the code. b. Council Discussion There was no discussion. u c. Council Consideration: Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt Ordinance No. 03-12. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 15 Ordinance No. 03-12, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, AMENDING CHAPTER 11.08 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF FALSE REPORTS ALLOWED FROM BURGLARY OR ROBBERY ALARMS WITHOUT CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PENALTY. The ordinance was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes 12. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10.36 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO BICYCLES AND ELECTRIC PERSONAL ASSISTIVE MOBILITY DEVICES a. Staff Report Police Chief Dickinson described some of the proposed changes to the code. The proposed amendments result from changes in the Oregon Revised Statutes relating to electric personal assistive mobility devices. b. Council Discussion There was no discussion. C. Council Consideration: Motion by Councilor Wilson, seconded by Councilor Moore, to adopt Ordinance No. 03-13. Ordinance No. 03-13, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TMC 10.36 BICYCLES. The ordinance was approved by unanimous vote: Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 16 13. CONSIDER ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 2.93 ACRES OF PROPERTY BY FANNO POINTE, L.L.C. FOR USE AS OPEN SPACE OR GREENWAY a. Staff Report Parks Manager Dan Plaza introduced this item. Fanno Pointe, L.L.C. has offered to dedicate a portion of its property, not eligible for development, to be used as greenway or open space. Mr. Plaza explained the approximately three acre parcel lies to the south of the new library site and will enable the extension of Fanno Creek trail. At the request of the city, Fanno Pointe has agreed to spray the site for noxious weeds. b. Council Discussion City Manager Monahan noted acceptance of the property would impact the library's access drive and the future overflow parking lot. Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen commented it was "good news" for the city to receive a piece of property that compliments the city's existing plans. C. Motion by Councilor Sherwood, seconded by Councilor Moore, to accept the dedication of approximately 2.9 acres of property by Fanno Pointe, L.L.C. The motion was approved by upaninicas vcte: Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen - Yes Councilor Moore - Yes Councilor Sherwood - Yes Councilor Wilson - Yes 14. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None. is 15. NON AGENDA ITEMS: See above; considered between Item Nos. 7 and 8. 16. EXECUTIVE SESSION: No executive session was held. Council business meeting recessed at 8:43 p.m. Council meeting resumed at 8:48 p.m. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 -Page 17 • STUDY SESSION continued > ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS continued • Councilor Sherwood reported an Affordable Housing Symposium would take place on January 29, 2004. The symposium is through the Vision Action Network, and Councilor Sherwood encouraged a city representative to attend. • Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen and Community Development Director Hendryx Informed the Council of an Urban Renewal workshop slated for January 21, 2004, from 7 to 9 p.m. at the Beaverton Library. Washington County and cities along the commuter rail route will be considering methods to create urban renewal opportunities along the corridor. The downtown urban renewal project was discussed in light of the county effort. > COUNCIL VACANCY OPTION REVIEW The Council, City Manager Monahan and City Attorney Ramis discussed various options to fill the vacancy created by Mayor Jim Griffith's death. General consensus was to give Mayer Pro Tern Dirksen time to decide if he would be wiling to sf rve as Interim Mayor through December, 2004. A mayoral election would be held in November, 2004, and the person chosen in the election would begin serving Mayor Griffith's remaining term in January, 2005. Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen would be required to resign from his position as Councilor, should he accept an appointment as Interim Mayor. The Council also talked about the selection process and appointment of a new Councilor. The ramifications of three Council vacancies on the November, 2004 ballot were discussed. The Council chose to continue its discussion of this matter at its January 13, 2004 meeting. The Council will also need to appoint a new Council President at that meeting. The Council discussed liaison appointments. The following is a list of changes/ updates to the list. Committee Name: Assigned To: Budget Subcommittee Open Community Development Block Grant Policy Sydney Sherwood Advisory Board Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 18 7~ Mayor's Appointment Advisory Committee Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen and Brian Moore (thru 2003). Sydney Sherwood will replace Brian Moore for 2004. Metro Technical Advisory Committee Brian Moore will attend if staff determines there is a critical issue. Otherwise staff will attend. Metro Policy Advisory Board Mayor was appointed as an alternate. City Manager Monahan will solicit other cities to consider filling the position with another Tigard Councilor. Nick Wilson volunteered to serve if appointed. Tigard Chamber of Commerce Mr. Monahan noted Public Works Director Wegner was serving as the city's representative for 2003. Washington County Coordinating Committee Nick Wilson Mayor's Meeting of City and Elected Officials Mr. Monahan will see if another city would be wil!ing to take this over. Tualatin Basin Natural Resource Coordinating Nick Wilson Committee Blue Ribbon Task Force Council requests a letter be sent to members temporarily postponing meetings. Youth Forum Council directed the forum X. continue. a Mayor Pro Tem Dirksen proposed a representative from the Youth Advisory Council serve as an ex-officio member on the City Council. Mr. Monahan stated such a proposal was evolving from within the youth council. v > ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS continued City Manager Monahan distributed a handout from the city's web page on the Skatepark Task Force. The article mentions "considering a name for the park." Mr. Monahan suggested the Council meet with Mr. Carlson and the task force in January to discuss when the property might be available and Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 19 71 to confirm previous commitments and responsibilities related to the park. The Council may be asked to solicit donations for the skatepark fund. Mayor Pro Tern Dirksen noted he had learned about less expensive materials used in skatepark construction at a recent conference. Councilor Sherwood added something needed to be done to get people energized about the park. The meeting adjourned at 9:58 p.m. Greer A. Gaston, Deputy City Recorder Attest: Mayor Date: 1 13 • D 1MDWCATHYNCCMN2003\031216 MINUTESAOC Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 16, 2003 - Page 20 ' Ae- eo &V Council Agenda Revised 12-15-03 ' l'CGAItD CITY COllCIL i MEETING CITY OF TIGARD DECEMBER- [ 6, 2003 6.30 p.m OREGON TIGARD ClTkll HAIL: l 3125 W jHAL4 BLVD- TIGAIZD, OR, 972231 PUBLIC NOTICE: Assistive Listening Devices are available for persons with impaired hearing and should be scheduled for Council meetings by noon on the Monday prior to the Council meeting. Please call 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). Upon request, the City will also endeavor to arrange for the f0lowirg services: O Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and • Qualified bilingual interpreters. Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead-time as possible. Please notify the City of your need by 5:00 p.m. on the Thursday preceding the meeting date by calling: 503-639-4171, ext. 2410 (voice) or 503-684-2772 (TDD - Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf). SEE ATTACHED AGENDA COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page I AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 16, 2003 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION > QUARTERLY MEETING - BUDGET COMMITTEE > PARK RESERVATION UPDATE - INITIATING AN ON-LINE PARKS RESERVATION SERVICE > COUNCIL VACANCY OPTION REVIEW • EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced Identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. 7:30 PM 1. BUSINESS MEETING 1.1 Call to Order - City Council a Local Contract Review Board 1.2 Roll Call 1.3 Pledge of Allegiance 1.4 Council Communications at Liaison Reports 1.5 Call to Council and Staff for Non-Agenda Items COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 2 Added- PROCLAMATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT • Congratulations to the Tigard High School Tigers Boys Football Team as 2003 State Champions Mayor Pro Tem: The Tigard High School football team won the 2003 State Championship on December 6, 2003. In recognition of their teamwork, winning spirit and the commitment of the team members and all those who worked to make this championship possible, the Tigard City Council congratulates the Tigers, the 2003 State Champions! As many of you know, Mayor Griffith was an avid Tigard High football fan. On behalf of Mayor Griffith's family, I want to express their sincere appreciation to the team for the signed football that was presented to Mrs. Griffith. I know this meant a lot to the Griffith family. Note: Coach Frank Geske and 9 team players are here this evening. Coach Geske was named 4A Coach of the Year and 6 players were named to the 4A State First Team. • Present Coach Geske with the proclamadon, candy mug and pen • Present the players with the clock/calculators 8t city pin 7:35 PM 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA (Two Minutes or Less, Please) 7:40 PM 3. CONSENT AGENDA: These items are considered to be routine and may be enacted in one motion without separate discussion. Anyone may request that an item be removed by motion for discussion and separate action. Motion to: 3.1 Approve Council Meeting Minutes: November 19, 2003 3.2 Approve the Dedication of a Portion of Right-of-Way Along Hall Boulevard to the Oregon Department of Transportation 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: 6 a. Approve Changes to the Pavement Major Maintenance Program Contra- with S-2 Contractors Inc. b. Approve Amendment to the Hail Boulevard i'Wall Street y;?tersection Project Contract with DeHaas 8T Associates and Authorize Additional i Amendments 3.4 Approve Proposed Library Policies and Procedures i • Consent Agenda -Items Removed for Separate Discussion: Any items requested to he removed from the Consent Agenda for separate discussion will. e considered immediately after the Council has voted on those items which do not need discussion. COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 3 7:45 PM 4. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) - BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN (ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003- 00003/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003-00004/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003-00005/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003-00006) ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2003-000031 2003-00004, 2003- 000OS, 2003-00005 BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN REQUEST: The City of Tigard is proposing to annex 1,378 acres of Washington County known as Bull Mountain through the annexation plan process. State law allows the City to annex territory within an urban growth boundary (UGB) pursuant to a detailed annexation plan, subject to voter approval. If the Tigard City Council approves the annexation proposal, it would set a date for the proposal to be placed on the ballot. LOCATION: The unincorporated area is within the UGB. It is generally bounded on the north by Barrows Road, on the east by Tigard City limits, on the south by Beef Bend Road, and on the west partially by 150th Avenue and near Roy Rogers Road. For specific boundary, see vicinity map. ZONE: The area includes R- 4.5 (Low-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 7,500 square feet), R-7 (Medium-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 5,000 square feet), R-12 (Medium-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 3,050 square feet) and R- 25 (Medium High-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 1,480 square feet). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are set out In Community Development Code Chapter 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; ORS Chapters 195.205 and 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. a. Continue Public Hearing from December 2, 2003 b. Staff Report - ` rese ° e ice' y c. Public Testimony 6 a, u~ ed Q ti~ ~ d n , R d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion f. Close Public Hearing g. Council Consideration: Resolution No. Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed Resolution. Councilor: I second the motion. i i Mayor Pro Tem: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor Pro Tem: Is there any discussion? COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 4 Mayor Pro Tem (after discussion): All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. please say "aye. " Councilors: Mayor Pro Tem: All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. please say "nay. " Councilors: Mayor Pro Tem: Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. Tie votes = failed motion. 8:15 PM 5. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING ON A BALLOT MEASURE FOR THE MARCH 9, 2004 ELECTION FOR A MEASURE EXPANDING THE TIGARD CITY LIMITS BY PHASED ANNEXATION a. Continue Public Hearing from December 2, 2003 b. Staff Report - C. Public Testimony - d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion E Close Public Hearing g. Council Consideration: Resolution No. Councilor: 1 move for adoption of the proposed Resolution. Councilor: I second the motion. Mayor Pro Tem: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. L City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) `r Mayor Pro Tem: Is there any discussion? Mayor Pro Tem ? (after discussion): All o those in favor o ado tin Resolution No. leases "aye. " i Councilors: Mayor Pro Tem: All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. , please say "nay. " Councilors: COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 5 Mayor Pro Tem: Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. Tie votes = failed motion. 8:30 PM 6. PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-JUDICIAL) - PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY STREET VACATION FOR 741 AVENUE AT LANDAU STREET VACATION (VAC 2003-00001) The Tigard City Council will consider the proposed vacation involving 3,241 square feet of public right-of-way that lies to the northwest of the SW 741 Avenue/Landau Street intersection. The reason for the vacation request is the Tigard Transportation System Plan indicates that SW 741 Avenue is to meet SW Landau Street at a 90 degree angle. To facilitate the realignment of SW 741 Avenue, the applicant has secured a right-of- way dedication agreement with the adjacent property owners to the east. With the successful vacation of the re.luested right-of-way, the subject square footage wc,ild be incorporated into the proposed parcels of the recently submitted Weigela Terrace Subdivision; however, the proposed lots of the subdivision do not need the square footage of the vacation application to meet minimum lot size standards of the underlying R-4.5 zoning district. The request was filed with the City on July 11, 2003 and initiated by the City Council at the request of the applicant on October 28, 2003. Any interested person may appear and be heard for or against the proposed vacation of said 741 Avenue @ Landau Street Public Right-of-Way Street Vacation. Any written objections or remonstrances shall be filed with the City Recorder by 7:30 PM on December 16, 2003. a. Open Public Hearing .1 b. Declarations or Challenges Mayor Pro Tem: Do any members of Council wish to report any ex parte contact or information gained outside the hearing, including any site visits? Have all members familiarized themselves with the application? Are there any challenges from the audience pertaining to the Council's jurisdiction to hear this matter or is there a challenge on the participation of any member of the Council? COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 6 OMMMM C. Staff Report: Community Development Staff d. Public Testimony Mayor Pro Tem: For all those wishing to testify, please be aware that failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the Council and parties an opportunity to respond to the issue will preclude an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals on this issue. Testimony and evidence must be directed toward the criteria described by staff or other criteria in the plan or land use regulation which you believe apply to the decision. Proponents Opponents Rebuttal e. Staff Recommendation f. Council Discussion g. Close Public Hearing h. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. Councilor: 1 move for adoption of the proposed Ordinance. Councilor: 1 second the motion. Mayor Pro Tem: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Ordinance. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor Pro Tem: Is there any discussion? Mayor Pro Tem (after discussion): Will the City Recorder please conduct a roll-call vote of Council. ity Recorder: Conducts roll call vote. Mayor Pro Tem: *Ordinance No. _ (is approved or fails) by a (unanimous or however votes were split) vote. i a Tie votes = failed motion. r COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 7 8:45 PM 7. CONSIDER AN AGREEMENT GRANTING THE CITY MEMBERSHIP ON THE JOINT WATER COMMISSION a. Staff Report: Public Works Staff b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Motion to authorize the Council President to sign an agreement granting the City membership on the Joint Water Commission. 9:00 PM 8. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CITY OF TIGARD/TRIMET MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING a. Staff Report: Community Development Staff b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Motion to approve the City of Tigard/TriMet Memorandum of Understanding and authorize the Council President to sign. 9:10 PM 9. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ACCEPTING THE 2003 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT AND APPROVING THE SPENDING OF FUNDS a. Open Public Hearing b. Summation by Police Staff C. Public Testimony d. Staff Recommendation e. Council Discussion f. Close Public Hearing g. Council Consideration: Motion to accept the grant and approve the spending of funds. 9:20 PM 10. CONSIDER A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #12 TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 BUDGET TO ACCEPT AND EXPEND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS a. Staff Report: Finance Staff b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Resolution No. a * ' e . if items 4 8t 5 (Bull Mt.) were not acted upon COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 8 Councilor: 1 move for adoption of the proposed Resolution. Councilor: I second the motion. Mayor Pro Tem: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor Pro Tem: Is there any discussion? Mayor Pro Tem (after discussion): All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. please say "aye. " Councilors: Mayor Pro Tem: All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. please say "nay. " Councilors: Mayor Pro Tem: Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. Tie votes = failed motion. 9:25 PM 11. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11.08 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO BURGLARY AND ROBBERY ALARM SYSTEMS a. Staff Report: Police Staff b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. ,M Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed Ordinance. Councilor: 1 second the motion. Mayor Pro Tem: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Ordinance. i i i City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) i i Mayor Pro Tem: Is there any discussion? Mayor Pro Tem (after discussion): Will the City Recorder please conduct a roll-call vote of Council. COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 9 City Recorder: Conducts roll call vote. Mayor Pro Tem: Ordinance No. _ (is approved or fails) by a (unanimous or however votes were split) vote. Tie votes = failed motion. 9:35 PM 12. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10.36 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO BICYCLES AND ELECTRIC PERSONAL ASSISTIVE MOBILITY DEVICES a. Staff Report: Police Staff b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Ordinance No. Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed Ordinance. Councilor: I second the motion. Mayor Pro Tem: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Ordinance. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor Pro Tem: Is there any discussion? Mayor Pro Tem (after discussion): Will the City Recorder please conduct a roll-call vote of Council. City Recorder: Conducts roll call vote. Mayor Pro Tem: Ordinance No. , (is approved or fails) by a (unanimous or however votes were split) vote. L Tie votes = failed motion. i i i i i COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 10 9:45 PM 13. CONSIDER ACCEPTING THE DEDICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 2.93 ACRES OF PROPERTY BY FANNO POINTE, L.L.C. FOR USE AS OPEN SPACE OR GREENWAY a. Staff Report: Public Works Staff b. Council Discussion C. Council Consideration: Motion to accept the dedication of approximately 2.93 acres of property by Fanno Pointe, L.L.C. for use as open space or greenway 9:50 PM 14. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS 15. NON AGENDA ITEMS Note. Katherlne Heads (and possibly !dark Padgett and Rex Caffill) w111 be in attendance. a. Consider a Resolution to Reappoint Mark Padgett and Appoint Rex Caffall to the Planning Commission and Appoint Katherine Meads as the Alternate to the Planning Commission - Council Discussion - Council Consideration: Resolution No. * if items 4 & 5 (Bull Mt.) were not acted upon Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed Resolution. Councilor: 1 second the motion. _Mayor Pro Tem: Will the Cityhy Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor Pro Tem: Is there any discussion? :y Mayor Pro Tem (after discussion, : All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. please say "aye. it Councilors: Mayor Pro Tem: All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No. please say "nay. " Councilors: COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 1 1 Mayor Pro Tem: Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. Tie votes = failed motion. b. Consider a Resolution to Appoint Robert Canselosi to the Tree Board, and Appoint ]im Bray as First Alternate and Colin Penno as Second Alternate Council Discussion Council Consideration: Resolution No. if items 4 8t 5 (Bull Mt.) were not acted upon Councilor: I move for adoption of the proposed Resolution. Councilor: 1 second the motion. Mayor Pro Tem: Will the City Recorder please read the number and title of the Resolution. City Recorder: (Reads as requested.) Mayor Pro Tem: Is there any discussion? Mayor Pro Tem (after discussion): All of those in favor of adopting Resolution No. _ please say "aye. " Councilors: Mayor Pro Tem: All of those opposed to adopting Resolution No.. please say "nay. " Councilors: Mayor Pro Tem: Resolution No. _(is adopted or fails) by a (unanimous, or however votes were split) vote. Tie votes = failed motion. 16. EXECUTIVE SESS101-4: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 12 10:00 PM 17. AD]OURNMENT I:\ADM\CATHY\CCA\2003\031218}. DOC L J 1 " I COUNCIL AGENDA - DECEMBER 16, 2003 page 13 City of Tigard, Oregon Affidavit of Posting CITY OF TIGARD OREGON In the Matter of the Proposed Ordinance(s) STATE OF OREGON ) County of Washington ) ss. City of Tigard ) 1, 6 a L & L l~✓► ~~c , being first duly sworn (or affirmed), by oath (or affirmation), depose and say: That I posted in the following public and conspicuous places, a copy of Ordinance Number(s) 03 - 03 - oL (5,; - /3., which were adopted at the City Council meeting of 1 02- /9- 63 , with a copy(s) of said Ordinance(s) being hereto attached and by reference made a part hereof, on the day of , 20-. V_ 1. Tigard City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 2. Tigard Public Library, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, Oregon 3. Tigard Water Building, 8777 SW Burnham, Tigard, Oregon Signature of Person who Performed Posting f: Subscribed and sworn (or aP 3ned) before me this day of VL GI,V 20~ . V 1s V OFFICIAL SEAL Sign ure of otary Public for Oregon o J BENGTSON -OREGON NOTARY PUBLIC COMMISSION NO. 368086 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APR. 27, 2007 \\TIG333\USR\DEPTS\ADM\GREEK\FORMS\AFFIDAVITS\AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING - ORDINANCE.DOC Attachment 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 03- 11 AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE VACATION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 3,241 SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY BETTER KNOWN AS SW 74' AVENUE WHICH LIES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SW 74T" AVENUE AND LANDAU STREET, IN THE CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON (VAC2003-00001). WHEREAS, the Tigard City Council initiated this vacation request pursuant to Section 15.08.040 of the Tigard Municipal Code on October 28, 2003, and has been recommended by the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, the approximate 3,241 square foot portion of the public right-of-way had previously been dedicated to the public; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested that the City of Tigard vacate an approximate 3,241 square foot portion of public right-of-way as described in Exhibit "A" and shown in Exhibit "B" better known as SW 70 Avenue; and WHEREAS, the said portion of public right-of-way is no longer necessary because of a secured dedication of 1,314 square feet to straighten the 74`h Avenue/Landau Street intersection; and WHEREAS, the City will no longer have maintenance responsibility of this area; and WHEREAS, all affected service providers, including utility companies and emergency service providers, have reviewed the vacation proposal and have provided no objections, provided a utility easement is provided to cover existing utility lines; and WHEREAS, notice has been mailed to all property owners abutting said vacation area and all owners in the affected area, as described by ORS 271.080; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Tigard Municipal Code 15.08.120, notice of the public hearing was posted in the area to be vacated and published in the newspaper; and WHEREAS, the property owners of the majority of the area affected have not objected in writing; and , WHEREAS, the City Council having considered the request on December 16, 2003, finds that it is in the public interest to approve the request to vacate said public right-of-way as the public interest will not be prejudiced by this vacation, as provided by ORS 271.120 and TMC Section 15.08.130; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that the following condition is necessary to vacate said land: 1. A public utility easement over the entire vacated area to provide for the existing and future utility lines shall be dedicated. ORDINANCE NO.03- Pagel of 2 i:\curpln\mathew\VAC\VAC2003-00001.ord (public hearing) ~t NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby orders the vacation of said 3,241 square foot portion of public right-of-way as shown and described in the attached Exhibits "A" and "B" (legal description and map of the area to be vacated), and by this reference, made part thereof. SECTION 2: The Tigard City Council further orders that the vacation be subject to the following condition: 1. A public utility easement over the entire vacated area to provide for the existing and future utility lines shall be dedicated. SECTION 3: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, approval by the Council President, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By Un1.11111' d6vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this /[PtUday of D o m be r 12003. r Greer A. Gaston, Deputy City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this -16k~-6 day of Decem.6e r , 2003. Craig D ksen, Council President Approved as to form: a A-, Attorney tom-- 2~ Date ORDINANCE NO. o3- / Page 2 of 2 is\curpln\mathew\VAC\VAC2003-OOOOI.ord (public hearing) Exhibit "A" HARRIS - MCMONAGLE ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERS - SURVEYORS 12555 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD OREGON, 97223 TEL. (503) 639-3453 FAX. (503) 639-1232 August 22, 2003 LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OF S.W. LANDAU STREET AND S.W. 74n AVEN UE. THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND BEING COMPRISED OF PORTION OF THE ABOVE SAID PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 1-SOUTH, RANGE 1WEST OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 25, THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 25, S 89"18'19" E 85.19 FEET; THENCE AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SECTION LINE N 00°41'41" E 27.00 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY 25 FOOT CURVED RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF S.W. LANDAU STREET AND POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE ON THE ARC OF A 250.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT HAYING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 42°14'23" (THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N 6x19'19" E 180.16 FEET) AN ARC DISTANCE OF 184.31 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A 212.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE BEING 27.00 FEET RADIAL TO THE CURVE FROM THE CENTERLINE OF THE FUTURE REALIGNMENT OF S.W. 7e AVENUE; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A 212.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15-53'16" (THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS S 22-33'15- W 58.60 FEET) AN ARC DISTANCE OF 58.79 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE S 14°36'37" W 18.09 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A 18.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 76°05'04" (THE CHORD OF VMICR BEARS S 52°39'09" W 22.18 FEET) AN ARC DISTANCE OF 23.90 FEET, TO A POINT THAT IS 27.00 FEET NORTHERLY OF AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 25; THENCE PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 25, N 89°18'19" W 114.88 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 3,241 SQUARE FEET. uB" Exhibit 1 ow I I ~ N I- 1 I I 0 50 100 E SCALE s I I CORDON & YARCOERM MEWART ft-21ZOd ST 41 7421 SW WAM CR 9= o~ A~-ts~t ~b I MD BOOK 620 PAGE 52 ~~..$2T3315~ I I TAX LOT 800 a' SO s f A, S D TAX YAP IM 25DC as IGatsd 9 E A t~,~$~,i` I I RIaR~ MAY 10 20 / 9 I 1f/CPJON AREA-3.241 SF. z/ Ppav= CA I I PAR Zp°~ vXrtvamc -1- - Et_ 25 FX13 B► S so1819' E tt .~f tti-0F-1fAY OEDIG710N PT. Ex cA N 0241.41' E ~ G~ ZY ~ 27 03-T/h76t>504' 78.0' ilffEk 70 SfPARA1E - 5363 J_-Q1~?211f t S 8916.11Y E 6S1Cr -S 8996'19' E 150.gw •'/4 SW LANDAU STREET f Se=M 25 • W 1 m I' ~/Wwrow 15 I Vzwo= I A , ur nr tw = !1 ~ t I wr wr am ax ~ aao I i, n is vX mi w Ins L _ I - I I I 1 ~ ~~~f J I I nocmr® HAS-McMONA= ASSOC., INC. - - '12555 IB`YD. r--WAY VACATION SKETCH Timm% °RXGGi pBWM- 639--3463 Flex- (W? 639--1232 AUGUST 21. 2003 ATTACH= A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO.03-12-_ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, AMENDING CHAPTER 11.08 OF THE TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF FALSE REPORTS ALLOWED FROM BURGLARY OR ROBBERY ALARMS WITHOUT CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PENALTY. WHEREAS, false reports from alarm systems cause the unnecessary use of valuable police officer time; and WHEREAS, the Tigard City Police Department has requested code amendments intended to reduce false alarms and reimburse the City for its response costs; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 11.08.020.7 is hereby amended to read as follows: 7. "Dispatch center" is the county facility used to receive emergency and general information from the public. SECTION 2: Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 11.08.030 is hereby amended to read as follows: 11.08.030 Alarm User Permits Required Every alarm user shall obtain an alarm user permit for each system from the Alarm Coordinator from the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter or prior to use of an alarm system. Users of systems having both robbery and burglary alarm capabilities shall obtain separate permits for each function. Application for a burglary, robbery, or combination burglary-robbery alarm user's permit and a fee shall be filed with the Alarm Coordinator each year. The fee shall be set by resoluttion of the City Council. Each permit shall bear the signature of the Chief of Police, and be for a one- year period. The permit shall be kept physically upon the premises using the alarm system, and shall be available for inspection by the Chief of Police or his representative. SECTION 3: Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 11.08.123.1 is hereby amended to read as follows: 1. If any alarm system produces two false alarms in any permit year, the Chief of Police shall provide by certified mail written notice of the fact asking the alarm user to take corrective action in regard to false alarms and informing the alarm user of the false alarm fee schedule. The fees shall be set by resolution of the City Council. SECTION 4: Tigard Municipal Code Chapter 11.08.123.3 is hereby amended to read as follows: ORDINANCE No. 03- /Z.. Page I 3. Upon any alarm system producing the third false alarm in a permit year, a fee per false alarm shall be charged to the alarm user. Subsequent false alarms shall be assessed an increasing fee that shall be set by resolution of the City Council. All fees assessed must be paid to the City Finance Division or a written appeal must be submitted to the Chief of Police within ten working days of fee assessment. SECTION 5: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Council President, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By UJ1Q,'7 i m ouS vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this llptO day of Decf m be-j- 2003. Greer A. Gaston, Deputy City Recorder APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this /6 6 day of ber e m br-r , 2003. - - - ~f- VY - ~ Craig sen, Council President Approved as to form: V r 4i:ty Attorney Date ORDINANCE No. 03- Page 2 ATTACHMIIdr A CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 03- 13 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TMC 10.36 BICYCLES WHEREAS, Senate Bill 787, governing electric personal assistive mobility devices commonly known as a Segway Scooter, will become effective January 1, 2004; and WHEREAS, TMC 10.36 - Bicycles - does not have language covering these devices; and WHEREAS, adopting the new language will update the TMC to accommodate these new provisions, amendments and changes to the Oregon Revised Statute (ORS). NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF TIGARD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: New section 10 is added to Definitions as stated on the attached TMC; and SECTION 2: Section 10.36.100 now includes the words "...and electric personal assistive mobility devices,"; and SECTION 3 Section 10.36.130 now includes the words "or electric personal assistive mobility device" and SECTION 4: Section 10.36.200 is amended to delete former wording and add "A violation of any provision of this chapter is a class D traffic violation. SECTION 5: This ordinance shall be effective 30 days after its passage by the Council, signature by the Council President, and posting by the City Recorder. PASSED: By (/n~~U,5 vote of all Council members present after being read by number and title only, this day of A6U) 4r rb 2003. ~l Greer A. Gaston, Deputy City Recorder ORDINANCE No. 03-13 Pagel APPROVED: By Tigard City Council this day of 2003. Crag Di sen, Council President proved as Jia o form: y Attorney y ~2 Z 03 Date i i i i 0 i ORDINANCE No. 03- /J Page 2 ATTACElMM C TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 10.36 BICYCLES and ELECTRIC (2) "Bicycle" means every device propelled PERSONAL ASSISTIVE MOBILITY by human power upon which any person may DEVICES. ride, having two tandem wheels either of which is over 12 inches in diameter. Sections: (3) "Highway, road and street" mean the 10.36.010 Definitions. entire width between the boundary lines of every 10.36.020 License--Required. way publicly maintained when any part thereof is (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). open to the use of the public for purposes of 10.36.030 License-Issuance. vehicular traffic. (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). 10.36.040 License Plate And Registration (4) "Park or parking" means the standing of Card Inspection. a vehicle, whether occupied or not, except when a (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). vehicle is temporarily standing for the purpose of 10.36.050 Safes--Report Required. and while actually engaged in loading or (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). unloading. 10.36.060 Sales--Transfer Of Registration. (5) "Parkway" means that portion of a street (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). not used as a roadway or as a sidewalk. 10.36.070 License-Tag--When Required. (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). (6) "Person" means every natural person, 10.36.100 Riding--On Certain Sidewalks firm, partnership, association or corporation. Prohibited. 10.36.120 Racing On Public Ways- (7) "Roadway" means that portion of a Permit Required. street or highway improved, designed or 10.36.130 Applicability Of Traffic Laws. ordinarily used for vehicular travel. 10.36.140 Lighting Requirements. 10.36.150 Brake Requirements. (8) "Safety zone" means the area or space 10.36.160 Speed. officially set apart within a roadway for the 10.36.170 Rider--At Least One Hand On exclusive use of pedestrians and which is Handlebars. protected or is so marked or indicated by adequate 10.36.180 Parking Restrictions. signs as to be plainly visible at all times while set 10.36.190 Violation-Permitting Or apart as a safety zone. Authorizing Prohibited. 10.36.200 Violation-Penalty. (9) "Sidewalk" means that portion of a street between the curblines, or the lateral lines of 10.36.010 Definitions. a roadway, and the adjacent property lines, intended for the use of pedestrians. (Ord. 67-72 The following words or phrases, except §1, 1967). where the context clearly indicates a different I 1 meaning, are defined as follows: (10) "Electric personal assistive mobility device" means a device that: (1) Is self-balancing (1) "Alley" means a narrow street through on two nontandem wheels; (2) Is designed to the middle of a block. transport one person in a standing position; (3) Has an electric propulsion system; and (4) Has a 10-36-1 Code Update: 11103 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE maximum speed of 15 miles per hour. wheelchairs, on any sidewalk in the City shall at all times yield the right-of-way to pedestrians 10.36.020 License--Required. using such sidewalk. (Ord. 78-3 §8(e), 1978; Ord. (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). 74-50B §l, 1974: Ord. 67-72 §10, 1967). (Repealed by Ord. 03-07; Ord. 67-72 §2, 1967). 10.36.030 License--Issuance. (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). 10.36.120 Racing On Public Ways— Permit Required. (Repealed by Ord. 03-07; Ord. 78-3 §8(b), 1978: Ord. 67-72 §3, 1967). No person shall engage in, or cause others to be engaged in, any bicycle racing upon the streets 10.36.040 License Plate And Registration or other public places in the City, except under a Card Inspection. permit from and under the supervision of the City (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). police department. (Ord. 67-72 §12, 1967). (Repealed by Ord. 03-07; Ord. 78-3 §8(c), 1978: 10.36.130 Applicability Of Traffic Laws. Ord. 67-72 §4, 1967). Every person riding or operating a bicycle or 10.36.050 Sales-Report Required. electric personal assistive mobility device on a (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). street or public path in the City shall be subject to all the provisions of the laws of the state of (Repealed by Ord. 03-07; Ord. 67-72 §5, 1967). Oregon applicable to such operation and shall also be subject to all the provisions of this title and any 10.36.060 Sales--Transfer Of other City ordinances applicable to such Registration. operation. (Ord. 67-72 § 13, 1967). (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). 10.36.140 Lighting Requirements. (Repealed by Ord. 03-07; Ord. 67-72 §6, 1967). Every bicycle operated within the City at any 10.36.070 License-Tag-When Required. time from a half hour after sunset to a half hour (Repealed By Ord. 03-07). before sunrise, or at any other time that visibility is poor due to insufficient light or unfavorable (Repealed Ord. 03-07; Ord. 67-72 §7, 1967). atmospheric conditions, shall be equipped with a lamp on the front exhibiting a white light visible 10.36.100 Riding-On Certain Sidewalks from a distance of at least five hundred feet to the Prohibited, front of such bicycle, and a red reflector on the rear of such size or characteristics and so mounted No person shall ride or operate any wheeled as to be visible at night from all distances within I vehicle, excepting wheelchairs and electric three hundred feet to fifty feet from the rear of Ler~onal assisii.~~emobility devices, on any such bicycle. A red light visible from a distance sidewalk adjacent and parallel to S.W. Main of five hundred feet to the rear may be used in Street; and provided further, that any person addition to the rear reflector. (Ord. 67-72 §14, riding any wheeled vehicle, excepting 1967). 10-36-2 Code Update: 11103 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Any person who shall vielate any of 10.36.150 Brake Requirements. iher-eefl, be punished by imprisonment ift the Gity Every bicycle operated upon the City streets jail fbr- not to exeeed five days or- by a fine net to shall be equipped with brakes adequate to control exeeed ten dollars, or- , er- bieyeles may be the movement of and to stop and to hold such vehicle. (Ord. 67-72 §15, 1967). da;s (OW 67 72 §20, 196?) n A violation of any provision of this chapter is 10.36.160 Speed. a class D traffic violation. No person shall operate a bicycle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions then existing. (Ord. 67-72 § 16, 1967). 10.36.170 Rider--At Least One Hand On Handlebars. No person operating a bicycle shall carry any package, bundle or article which prevents the rider from keeping at least one hand upon the handlebars and in full control of such bicycle. (Ord. 67-72 § 17, 1967). 10.36.180 Parking Restrictions. From and after December 18, 1967, it is unlawful for any person to park or leave a bicycle upon the sidewalk within the City; except in areas designated by ordinance, which areas shall be properly marked by signs or painting and provided with racks for parking bicycles. (Ord. 67-72 § 18, 1967). 10.36.190 Violation--Permitting Or Authorizing Prohibited. No parents of any minor child and no guardian of any minor ward shall authorize or knowingly permit any such minor child or ward to violate any of the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 67-72 §19, 1967). 10.36.200 Violation-Penalty. 10-36-3 Code Update: 11103 7~ AGENDA TIGARD CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING - STUDY SESSION December 16, 2003 - 6:30 p.m. 13125 SW Hall Boulevard, Tigard, Oregon The Study Setslon is held in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room. Enter at the back of Town Hall. The Council encourages Interested citizens to attend all or part of the meeting if the number of attendees exceeds the capacity of the Conference Room, the Council may move the Study Sesslon to the Town Hall. 6:30 PM • STUDY SESSION 0 > QUARTERLY MEETING - BUDGET COMMITTEE > PARK RESERVATION UPDATE - INITIATING AN ON-LINE PARKS RESERVATION SERVICE > ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS a. Bull Mountain Annexation Hearing Process • Distribute December 12, 2003 Memo from City Attorney's office re: Tigard/Bull Mountain • Distribute December 12, 2003 Memo from City Attorney's office re: Urban Service Provider Annexation • Distribute draft "Resolution of Intent" • Memo regarding possible White Paper Task Forces b. Community development update on Bretton Woods C. Urban Renewal Workshop January 21, 2004 from 7 to 9 p.m. at the Beaverton library d. Attendance at the coffee talk scheduled for December 18 at 7 p.m., and discussion of future coffee talks e. Calendar Review January 12 - Council Goal Setting Session - 1 p.m. - Tigard Water Auditorium January 13 - Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. - Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Vision Update January 20 - Special Workshop Session - 5 p.m. - Transportation Strategic Planning January 27 - Council Meeting - 6:30 p.m. > MEETING AGENDA a. Added.- Proclamation and Acknowledgment of the Tigard High School Football Team - 2003 State Champions b. Notation was added on items #4 &r#5. • Bull Mountain Annexation Plan ex Ballot Measure - showing that the Staff Report was presented and Public Testimony was concluded on December 2, 2003 C. Change: Greenway Property Donation - the staff report will be done by public works staff, not engineering staff d. Added as non agenda: - Consider resolution - Planning Commission appointments - Consider resolution - Tree Board appointment > COUNCIL VACANCY OPTION REVIEW - Review Council ex Staff Liaison Appointment Matrix EXECUTIVE SESSION: The Tigard City Council may go into Executive Session. If an Executive Session is called to order, the appropriate ORS citation will be announced identifying the applicable statute. All discussions are confidential and those present may disclose nothing from the Session. Representatives of the news media are allowed to attend Executive Sessions, as provided by ORS 192.660(3), but must not disclose any information discussed. No Executive Session may be held for the purpose of taking any final action or making any final decision. Executive Sessions are closed to the public. Executive Session - The Public Meetings Law authorizes governing bodies to meet in executive session in certain limited situations (ORS 192.660). An "executive session" is defined as "any meeting or part of a meeting of a governing body, which Is dosed to certain persons for deliberation on certain matters." Permissible Purposes for Executive Sessions: 192.660(l) (a) - Employment of public officers, employees and agents, if the body has satisfied certain prerequisites. 192.660(l) (b) - Discipline of public officers and employees (unless affected person requests to have an open hearing). 192.660(l) (c) - To consider matters pertaining to medical staff of a public hospital. 192.660(l) (d) - Labor negotiations. (News media can be excluded in this instance.) 192.660(l) (e) - Real property transaction negotiations. 192.660(l) (f) - Exempt public records - to consider records that are "exempt by law from public inspection." These records are specifically identified in the Oregon Revised Statutes. 192-660(l) (g) - Trade negotiations - involving matters of trade or commerce in which the governing body is competing with other governing bodies. 192.660(l) (h) - Legal counsel - Executive session are appropriate for consultation with counsel concerning legal rights and duties regarding current litigation or litigation likely to be filed. 192.660(l) (1) - To review and evaluate, pursuant to standards, criteria, and policy directives adopted by the governing body, the employment-related performance of the chief executive officer, a public officer, employee or staff member unless the affected person requests an open hearing. The standards, criteria and policy directives to be used in evaluating chief executive officers shall be adopted by the governing body in meetings open to the public in which there has been an opportunity for public comment. 192.660 (1) Public investments - to carry on negotiations under ORS Chapter 293 with private persons or businesses regarding proposed acquisition, exchange or liquidation of public investments. 192.660 (1) (k)- Relates to health professional regulatory board. Lladtn~calhyticounoihplnk sheet - study session sgendes%2=W31218.doe - s-h~dY s~ o-N. 1-~ndauf Fi'drrt. Crol9 f raoser City of Tigard 12 _ r to _ o FY 2004-05 Budget Calendar ■ December 11 & 12, 2004 • Budget Training E January 16, 2004 • FY 2003-04 Revenue & Expenditure projections due to Finance ■ February 2, 2004 • Budget requests and revenue due to Finance • Training Plans due to HR & Finance • Social Services/Arts/Events funding requests due. ■ March 1 through March 29, 2004 • City Manager/Finance/Department meetings • City Manager Decisions ■ April 26, 2004 • Budget Committee begins meeting • Financial Forecast Update • Distribution of Proposed Budget ■ May 3, 2004 • Budget Hearings N May 10, 2004 • Budget Hearings 0 May 17, 2004 • Budget Hearings • Final Decisions ■ May 18, 2004 • Election - WCCLS Local Option Levy ■ May 24, 2004 • Potential Budget Committee Meeting ® June 8, 2004 • Council adopts budget HandotA- from cme5 (gyros se r Budget Strategies/GuideOines 12- _ to = o 5 ■ No funding for Bull Mountain Annexation ➢ Potential annexation date not until July 1, 2005 ■ FY 2003-04 frozen positions will be funded ➢ 4 Police ➢ 1 Parks ■ No or limited new positions, except A New Library ➢ Take over of CWS area As agreed to by City Manager ■ No restoration of funding cuts made in FY 2003-04 Budget ■ Capital Projects ➢ Set Priorities (establish order of attack) ➢ Revise Master Plans and Needs Assessments in light of available funding ➢ Continue building reserves for knowable needs (i.e. Computer System replacement, HVAC replacement, City Hall Upgrade, etc.) - Renewal & Replacement ■ Revenues/Resources ➢ Continue regular program of fee reviews/increases ➢ Identify new, on going revenue source(s) ➢ Re-examine assignment of costs to funds Sfuc(y AGENDA ITEM # SQL i .^1Yt FOR AGENDA OF 12/16/03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Park Reservations Update Re: initiating an on-line parks reservation service PREPARED BY: Dan Plaza DEPT HEAD OK kq~CITY MGR OK y ~ / ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Consider entering into an agreement to place park reservations on-line. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council give direction to proceed with placing park reservations on-line. INFORMATION SUMMARY In an effort to save money and time it is proposed that the Parks Division initiate an on-line park reservation service. Projections show that if we continue to make reservations manually the reservation cost will continue to rise due to increases in part-time personnel costs, materials and supplies. Currently, we handle picnic shelter and field reservations on a manual basis only. The administration cost is $13,264 per annum (clerical, materials and supplies). in FY '02-'03, 438 reservations were made at a cost of $28.00 per manual reservation. During this year's peak reservation period, 497 reservations were made at a cost of $31.00 per manual reservation. In June, Council established a cost recovery rate of 70% by the year 2006. To meet this goal, an on-line reservation service is being recommended. Currently, the City's cost per reservation done manually is $31.00, while an on-line service is projected to reduce the cost per reservation to only $10.00 by the year 2006 - a reduction of $21.00. While researching for service providers, only one company, RecNet, was found that met the department's established criteria of a) an on-line system specifically designed for park and recreation reservations, b) ability to accept and process credit cards, c) ease of use for staff and the public, d) services provided by a well-established, experienced company, e) setup and training program, f) customer service and technical support, and g) cost effective. Further, the City's Finance Department, Network Services Division, and Risk Management Division were contacted and each Department/Division have approved going on-line with RecNet. Other companies considered were: Class Software Solutions (no on-line service for parks and rcc:ccation reservations) and Book King (no on-line service for parks and recreation reservations). Finance, Risk Management, and Network Services have been consulted and each Department/Division has checked-off on initiating the on-line service. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Stay with manual system. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY n/a ATTACHMENT LIST Memo from Dan Plaza to Ed Wegner dated 11/25/03 FISCAL NOTES Initial, one-time setup and training costs total $3,500 and will be paid from the General Fund. The minimum transaction fee is $250 per month ($3,000 annually). Service transaction fees are a percentage of the total reservation which is 6.5% plus $0.50 or $2.00 whichever is greater. Credit Card transaction fee is 3.75% of the total reservation. These transaction fees will be paid by the administrative/application fee of $20.00 for residents and $40.00 for non-residents. For example; a non-resident picnic reservation for 4-hours at Cook Park with less than 50 people: Administration/Application Fee $ 40.00 Rental Fee 96.00 Total $136.00 RecNet Service Transaction Fee $ 9.00 Credit Card Transaction Fee 5.00 Total Transaction Fees paid to RecNet $ 14.00 (total manual cost would be $31.00) Total Revenue to City of Tigard $122.00 MEMORANDUM TO: Ed Wegner FROM: Dan Plaza and Shawn Cutsforth RE: Park Reservation Program DATE: December 2, 2003 BACKGROUND In an effort to save money and time it is proposed that the Parks Division initiate an on-line park reservation program. Projections show that if we continue to make reservations manually the reservation cost will continue to rise due to increases in part- time personnel costs, materials and supplies. In a recent Public Works questionnaire, rising park reservation administrative costs was identified as one of the Department's top problems to solve. Currently, we handle picnic shelter and field reservations on a manual basis only. The administration cost is $13,264 per annum (clerical, materials and supplies). The majority of the administration costs are during the peak reservation period of May thru September. In FY '02-'03, 438 reservations were made at a cost of $28.00 per manual reservation. During this year's peak reservation period, 497 reservations were made at a cost of $31.00 per manual reservation. In June, Council established a cost recovery rate of 70% by the year 2006. To meet this goal, an on-line reservation service is being recommended. Currently, the City's cost per reservation done manually is $31.00, while an on-line service is projected to reduce the cost per reservation to only $10.00 by the year 2006 - a reduction of $21.00 per reservation. While researching for service providers, only one company, RecNet, was found that met it the department's established criteria of. a) an on-line system specifically designed for park and recreation reservations, b) ability to accept and process credit cards, c) ease of use for staff and the public, d) services provided by a well-established, experienced company, e) setup and training program, f) customer service and technical support, and g) cost effective. Further, the City's Finance Department, Network Services Division, and Risk Management Division were contacted and each Department/Division have approved going on-line with RecNet. Other companies considered were: Class Software Solutions (no on-line service for parks and recreation reservations) and Book King (no on-line service for parks and recreation reservations). Finance, Risk Management, and Network Services have been consulted and each Department/Division has checked-off on initiating the on-line service. Initial, one-time setup and training costs total $3,500 and will be paid from the General Fund. The minimum transaction fee is $250 per month ($3,000 annually). Service transaction fees are a percentage of the total reservation which is 6.5% plus $0.50 with a minimum fee of $2.00. The credit card transaction fee is 3.75% of the total reservation. These transaction fees will be paid by the administrative/application fee of $20.00 for residents and $40.00 for non-residents. For example; a non-resident picnic reservation for 4-hours at Cook Park with less than 50 people: Administration/Application Fee $ 40.00 Rental Fee 96.00 Total $136.00 RecNet Service Transaction Fee $ 9.00 Credit Card Transaction Fee 5.00 Total Transaction Fees paid to RecNet $ 14.00 (total manual cost would be $31.00) Total Revenue to City of Tigard $122.00 Only one of four agencies we requested information from responded. The one agency that responded had very positive things to say about RecNet. They are as follows: - no negative issues with the company - customer services were deemed excellent - very little down time has been experienced - no software to maintain - very use friendly and easy for staff to become proficient at - generates good reports, contracts, receipts, that are easy to read by staff and customers - did not experience any procedural changes going from manual to automated system RECOMMENDATION Our recommendation is to go with RecNet for our park reservation needs. We also i recommend that we offer a $5.00 discount per reservation when made on-line. A discount will encourage the public to utilize the on-line system. i Park Reservations On-Line Services for . Accept reservations for facilities at: Park Reservations ■ Cook Park . Summerlake Park ■ Facilities include: City of Tigard Public Works Department ■ Picnic Shelters City Council Meeting ■ Sports Fields December 16, 2003 Reservations & Costs Initial Steps . Reservations have risen steadily ■ In June 2003, Council set the goal: . 438 in FY 2002 - 2003 . Recover 70% of actual reservation costs . 497 in FY 2003 - 2004 ■ Identified option to minimize cost: ■ Costs per reservation have also risen On-Line Reservation Services ■ $28 in FY 2002 - 2003 ' . $31 in FY 2003 - 2004 On-line Benefits Staff's Selection Criteria Criteria for an acceptable system included: ■ Customer Convenience ■ Designed for Park & Recreation Reservations . Accepts & Processes Credit Cards i e Ability to accept credit cards . Ease of Use . Well Established & Experienced Company ■ Lower "per reservation" costs ■ Provides Set-Up & Training Programs I . Experienced Customer Service Staff ■ Experienced Technical Support Staff . Cost Effective 1 Companies Reviewed Costs Per Reservation ■ ONE company met established criteria ■ Current Costs (Manual Reservations) : . FY 2002 - 2003 = $28.00 . Reviewed qualifications of 5 companies . FY 2003 - 2004 = $31.00 . Most not designed for park reservations . Projected Costs (On Line Reservations) ■ Collaborated with other departments: . FY 2004 - 2005 = $27.00 ■ Finance Assumes 15% use of online reservations services ■ Risk Management . FY 2005 - 2008 = $10.00 ■ Network Services Assumes 100% use of online reservation services Costs to the City Advertising On-Line Service . Set-up & training fee . $3,500.00 . Cityscape . Minimum transaction fee . $250.00 per month ■ Community Connectors . Service transaction fee: City's Website . 6.5% of the rem" t on total P~ $oso ■ Park Reservation's Voice Mail Phone Line . Minknun service tnna.c6on lee 0152.00 . Credit card transaction fee . 3.75% of reservation ■ Tigard Times . As directed by Council, above fees will be paid via ■ Oregonian . Increased Ad ninistratlvefAWlication tee ■ Advise Walk-in Traffic . $20 forres)dents ■ City Hall Display Board . $40 for non-residents ■ TVTV (Focus on Tigard & Bulletin Board) Staff Recommendation Proceed with online services z. Offer a $5 discount for: . Reservations made on-line Valid for first year of on-line services Cost for 1st year discount= $2,500 { i f 3 L 0 ~ 551 tf1'L. 120- I (o - D3 RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & iBACHRACH, LLP Attorneys At Law MEMORANDUM 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 (503) 222-4402 Fax: (503) 243-2944 TO: City Council, William Monahan, Jim Hendryx City of Tigard FROM: Timothy V. Ramis, Gary Firestone City Attorney's Office DATE: December 12, 2003 RE: Tigard/Bull Mountain At the December 2, 2003, City Council meeting on the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan, a question was asked whether the City Attorney's office had provided a legal analysis of the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan (BMAP). This memorandum describes the legal standards and discusses what the City Attomey's office has done to review the BMAP. Lelsal Standard Annexations by means of an annexation plan are governed by ORS 195.205 through 195.235. Nothing in those sections requires a legal review of the annexation plan. ORS 195.220(1) specifies that an annexation plan must include the following: (a) The timing and sequence of annexation; (b) Local standards of urban service availability required as a precondition of annexation; (c) The planned schedules for providing urban services to the territory; (d) The effects on existing urban service providers: (e) The long-term benefits of the annexation plan. The annexation plan included separate sections on each of these topics. ORS 195.220(2) requires consistency with applicable Comprehensive Plan policies. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan policies was addressed in the application narrative submitted with the land use application. Memorandum re: Tigard/Bull Mountain December 12, 2003 Page 2 Actions by the City Attorney's Office Staff consulted with the City Attorney's office throughout the process. The City Attorney's office provided both procedural and substantive advice throughout the process. The City Attorney's office reviewed numerous drafts of the Annexation Plan. The City Attorney's office prepared the application narrative, which addressed applicable standards, including ORS Chapter 195 and applicable Comprehensive Plan policies. The application narrative concluded that the Annexation Plan was consistent with all applicable standards. Based on our review and participation on the process, we have concluded that the annexation plan meets substantive standards and that the City has followed required procedures to date. GFF/ Q/munirl'igard/Bmapmemo 121203 6&d,4 Hesston 12--Y& -63 RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP Attorneys At Law MEMORANDUM 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 (503) 222-4402 Fax: (503) 243-2944 TO: City Council, William Monahan, Jim Hendryx City of Tigard FROM: Timothy V. Ramis, Gary Firestone City Attorney's Office DATE: December 12, 2003 RE: Urban Service Provider Annexation ISSUE Does the City of Tigard have the authority to annex territory by the annexation plan method provided by ORS 195.205 to 195.235? ANSWER Yes. Any city may annex under ORS 195.205. Even if there is a requirement that the city provide an urban service, the City does provide urban services. ANALYSIS ORS 195.205(1) provides in part: A city or district that provides an urban service may annex territory under ORS 195.02, 195.060 to 195.085, 195.145 to 195.235, 197.005, 197.319, 197.320, 197.335 and 223.304 . An argument has been made that Tigard does not comply with this section because it does not provide an urban service. This argument fails for two reasons: (1) the language "that provides an urban service" applies only to districts, and (2) the City does provide urban services. r, Memorandum re: Urban Service Provider Annexation December 12, 2003 Page 2 The phrase `.`that provides an urban service" could be read to apply only to "district" or to both "city" and "district." We believe that the language "that provides an urban service" applies only to "district." The interpretation of the language that makes most sense is that it was intended to exclude rural service districts from using the annexation process, not to exclude cities from using the process. However, even if "that provides an urban service" modifies "city," the City does provide urban services. The list of statutes referred to in ORS 195.205(1) includes ORS 195.065, which specifies that "urban services" includes, among other things, sanitary sewers, water, parks, and streets. The City provides each of these services. The City provides at least one urban service and therefore is an entity that may annex under ORS 195.205, even if "that provides an urban service" applies to "cit Y•" G:\rnuni\Tigard\urbservices120803.wpd MEMMM / 2 -l(o `03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING IN JULY, 2004 ON THE BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN AND PLACE THE BALLOT MEASURE BEFORE THE ELECTORATE IN NOVEMBER, 2004. WHEREAS, for over 20 years, the City of Tigard and Washington County have recognized that Bull Mountain and its citizens would be best served by the City of Tigard; and WHEREAS, one of Council's goals is to establish an annexation policy for unincorporated non-island areas; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard, along with Washington County began looking at the benefits and costs of annexing the Bull Mountain area in March 2001; and WHEREAS, the Bull Mountain Annexation study was completed in 2002, after input from Bull Mountain residents, which identifies potential costs and revenues for the area; and WHEREAS, in order to gage the public support for a potential annexation, a survey was conducted of registered voters in the unincorporated Bull Mountain area and the City of Tigard; and WHEREAS, the Draft Facilities and Services Assessment Report for the Bull Mountain Area was presented to Council in June and July 2003; and WHEREAS, ORS 195.220 authorizes "annexation plan" type annexations which allows territory to be annexed if a majority of all of the votes cast in the territory and the city favor the annexation plan; and WHEREAS, there are several steps leading up to an election on an annexation plan, including preparation of an annexation plan, public outreach, public hearing, preparation of ballot title, election, etc.; and WHEREAS, Council has considered the alternatives and determined that an annexation plan type of annexation is the most efficient and effective means to provide unincorporated Bull Mountain and Tigard residents the opportunity to decide on the issue of annexation while also addressing the City of Tigard and Washington County goals of annexing the unincorporated Bull Mountain area; and WHEREAS, per the Urban Service Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Tigard and Washington County, the County shall allow the City to collect a Park System Development Charge (SDC) for new development for the period between the approval date of the Annexation Plan and the effective date of the annexation; I I WHEREAS, Council reviewed and discussed the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan at the Dec. 2 and Dec. 16, 2003 and determined that the Plan meets the approval criteria as identified in ORS 195 and 222, Metro Code Chapter 3.09; Tigard Community Code Chapter 18; RESOLUTION NO. 03 - Page I 1:\CDADMUERREEVIM\Annexation\RESOLUTION 12-16-03.doe ,S/tcdL . l2-l!v -03 MEMORANDUM Administration CITY OF TIGARD Shaping A Better Community TO: Members of the City Council FROM: Bill Monahan, City Manager DATE: December 16, 2003 SUBJECT: Bull Mountain Annexation - White Paper Task Forces The City Council is considering delaying action on the decision to adopt the annexation plan for Bull Mountain. Under consideration is the potential to delay a decision until July, 2004 allowing sufficient time for City, County, CPO, and citizen representatives to meet and discuss several key issues. Discussion of the key issues (streets, parks and open space, sheriff services, comprehensive planning, etc.) would take place from January through June 2004. An expected outcome of the discussions would be creation of a White Paper addressing the issues and opportunities related to each topic and the funding availability and shortfalls which are anticipated. To assist the City Council in defining the tasks and likely participants in the White Paper Task Force, I have outlined a few of the tasks. I would appreciate your review and comment so staff can develop these task forces over the next few weeks. Attached are brief outlines of the streets, parks and open space, and transition of service from sheriff to police. i:%adm\bH?Vm ost2 M%councit12ISMwhitepapertasidorcas.doc i J 0 i CORRECTION THE PRECEEDING RECORD OR DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN REPHOTOGRAPHED TO ASSURE LEGIBILITY OR SEQUENCE AND THEIR IMAGE OR IMAGES APPEAR IMMEDIATLEY HEREAFTER. WHEREAS, after receiving public testimony and submittals at the December 2, 2003 public hearing, Council determined that additional time is needed to work with Washington County and the public to communicate the benefits of the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan recommendations and to place the Plan before the voters. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: Council directs staff to form appropriate subcommittees, consisting of Washington County representatives, Tigard residents, and unincorporated Bull Mountain residents to provide additional time for public discussion and review of key benefits of the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan; SECTION 2: Council will review subcommittee work by July 2004 and consider placing the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan on the November 2004 ballot with a July 1, 2005 annexation date; SECTION 3: Council requests that the Washington County Board of Commissioners accept this resolution as a commitment from the Tigard City Council and begin collecting parks System Development Charges in the unincorporated area to set the funds aside until the effective annexation date; SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This _ day of 12003. Mayor - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 03 - Page 2 [:\CDADMUERREEUIM\Amexation\RE.SOLLrrION 12-16-03.doc ad r f 3e-'%Sd-A- 12.16) -03 MEMORANDUM Administration CITY OF TIGARD Shaping A Better Community TO: Members of the City Council FROM: Bill Monahan, City Manager DATE: December 16, 2003 SUBJECT: Bull Mountain Annexation - White Paper Task Forces The City Council is considering delaying action on the decision to adopt the annexation plan for Bull Mountain. Under consideration is the potential to delay a decision until July, 2004 allowing sufficient time for City, County, CPO, and citizen representatives to meet and discuss several key issues. Discussion of the key issues (streets, parks and open space, sheriff services, comprehensive planning, etc.) would take place from January through June 2004. An expected outcome of the discussions would be creation of a White Paper addressing the issues and opportunities related to each topic and the funding availability and shortfalls which are anticipated. To assist the City Council in defining the tasks and likely participants in the White Paper Task Force, I have outlined a4ew of the tasks. I would appreciate your review and comment so staff can develop these task forces over the next few weeks. Attached are brief outlines of the streets, parks and open space, and transition of service from sheriff to police. itadmlbiTa*=s%2003teounci1121503 whitepapertasldoroes.doc Streets Task Force Tasks to be worked on: ■ Review of the conditions of all streets within the unincorporated area. ■ Determine which streets will be transferred eventually to Tigard and which, if any, will remain under County jurisdiction. ■ Determine what revenue will be transferred to Tigard from the enhanced road maintenance district at the time of annexation. ■ Determine what improvements are planned, and will be made, by Washington County prior to the effective date of annexation. ■ Determine what road improvements the County can and will make to roads after the effective date of annexation. ■ Assess the pros and cons of the City requesting transfer of jurisdiction of county roads. Develop a proposal including timing, sequencing, and identification of conditions which are necessary for transfer to occur. ■ Determine eligibility of any roads in the area for future Washington County MSTIP funding. Specifically, determine the County commitment to fund improvements to Bull Mountain Road under MSTIP. ■ Review the process utilized by Washington County since the mid 1980s when developers routinely were required to provide non-remonstrance agreements for all new developments. The non-remonstrance agreements either promised financial participation on future road improvements or maintenance. ■ Assess the extent of the non-remonstrance agreements and determine if Washington County should form Local Improvement Districts, calling in the non- remonstrance agreements, to make road improvements. ■ Obtain and review legal analysis from the County Counsel's office regarding whether after annexation the City or County can enforce the non-remonstrance agreements for: 1. a County LID, 2. a City LID, or 3. a combined County/City LID ■ Determine the extent of road improvements which will be needed in the area and the possible means of funding the improvements with resources from: 1. Washington County, 2. LIDs formed from existing enforceable non-remonstrance agreements, 3. Conditions of development which can be legally imposed upon future development. ■ Determine the unfunded road improvement needs that will remain after the C revenue generating tools identified above have been exhausted. i Task Force Participants: i ■ Washington County Administration ■ Washington County Department of Land Use and Transportation ■ Tigard City Engineer ■ Tigard Public Works ■ Representatives of the Tigard Transportation Financing Strategies Task Force ■ CPO 4b ■ Citizens from City of Tigard and the unincorporated area (number to be determined). Parks and Open Space Planning Task Force Tasks to be worked on: ■ Review of existing publicly owned parks and open space in the unincorporated Bull Mountain area. ■ Review of City produced documents which detail the remaining development potential in the area. ■ Review the City report on the park deficiencies in the area. ■ Review the Parks System Development Charge (SDC) methodology and fee structure to determine if adjustments are needed. ■ Project the remaining opportunities for Parks SDC revenue potential for the area, based upon remaining developable lots. ■ Review County action to create a Parks SDC including the status of the effort, potential revenue generation, and specific details of the policy implementation. ■ Calculate the total funds likely to be generated in SDCs from the area, determine what the funds can be used for to apply to the need. ■ Based on projected SDCs to be generated, develop a draft CIP for parks and greenway which, among other things: o Calculates acreage to be purchased, o Identifies a list of potential site to purchase, o Defines the facilities which could be built/installed, o Would be applied to develop for public use the Cache Creek property. ■ Define the difference between the facilities which could be developed and the total need of the area using the SDC methodology as a basis. ■ Explore whether land acquisition and development for parks can and should occur outside the area, in the UGB expansion areas or beyond. ■ Review other recreational needs and opportunities for the area other than parks and open spaces (i.e. trails, paths, etc.). Task Force Participants: ■ Representatives of: o Washington County o City of Tigard ■ Public Works - Parks Division ■ Community Development o Tigard Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee o CPO 4b L o Citizens of the unincorporated area and City of Tigard (number to be determined). a 3 7 Transition from Sheriff to Police Task Force Tasks to be worked on: ■ Plan for the transition of service delivery, at the time of annexation, from Washington County Sheriff to Tigard Police. Among the specific questions to be answered are: 1. What level of service will be provided to the area by Tigard Police? 2. What level of service will be provided to the area by Washington County Sheriff? 3. How will the agencies coordinate their efforts? Task Force Participants: ■ Representatives of: o Washington County Administration o Washington County Sheriff o City of Tigard Administration o City of Tigard Finance o City of Tigard Police 1:tedm%biINet1erst20=White paper task torces.doc Sessr'ox_. Il~-D3 MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON TO: Honorable City Council FROM: Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder DATE: December 2, 2003 SUBJECT: Vacancy Information Attached is information regarding options for a vacancy on the Council: • See Charter, Page C-2, second paragraph • July 11, 2000 memo from Tim Ramis about "Mayoral Position" vacancy and the options available for filling the position • Council minutes of July 11, 2000, (excerpt) where the discussion of the vacancy in the position of Mayor was held • Council minutes of July 18, 2000, (excerpt) where the discussion of the vacancy in the position of Mayor was held -C-Cy .dW TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE current office at the time of filing for the other Measure 53, November 2,1982 election). office. A resignation submitted to satisfy this section shall not be withdrawn. A resignation Section 9. shall be adequate for purposes of this section if it provides for the termination of the signer's service Repealed by Ordinance 72-16, Section 9, May in the office not later than the last day before 23,1972 election. service would begin in the office for which that person seeks to become a candidate. Section 10. OTHER OFFICERS. 7 In the event the office of mayor or councilor Additional officers of the City shall be a city becomes vacant before the normal expiration of its manager, municipal judge, a recorder, and such term a special election may be held at the next other officers as the council deems necessary. available date to fill the office for the unexpired Each of these officers shall be appointed and may term. Such an election shall only take place if the be removed by consent of the council. The council can schedule and hold a special election at council may combine any two or more appointive least twelve months before the term would city offices. The council may designate any otherwise expire. If an election is held, it shall be appointive officers to supervise any other held in accordance with the election laws of the appointive officer except the municipal judge in state of Oregon and city ordinances not the exercise of judicial functions. (Measure 34-88, inconsistent with such election laws. The council November 3, 1998 election, Res. 9846; Measure may appoint a person to fill a vacancy until an 34-58, November 5, 1996 election, Res. 96-53; election can be held. (Res. 93-63, May 17, 1994 Measure 52, November 5,1985 election). election: Measure 34-7, May 15, 1990 election: Measure 51, November 4, 1986 election: Measure Section 11. SALARIES. 51, November 5, 1985 election: Measure 53, November 2, 1982 election: Measure 53, May 18, The compensation for the services of each 1982 election). city officer and employees shall be the amount fixed by the council. Section 8. COUNCILORS. Aection 12 QUALIFICATIONS OF The councilors holding office at the time of OFFICERS. adoption of this amendment shall hold their offices for-the balance of the terms for which they A qualified elector within the meaning of the were elected or appointed and until their State Constitution, who will have resided successors are elected and qualified. At each continuously for a period of twelve (12) months or L general election after this amendment takes effect, more immediately preceding the election in an "r two councilors shall be elected for four-year area which is within the corporate boundaries of terms, with the two candidates receiving the the City as the same shall exist as of a date one highest number of votes being elected to office. In hundred twenty (120) calendar days immediately J the event a vacancy exists on the City Council and prior to the date of the election (inclusive of all a a special election is called to fill the vacancy as territory previously effectively annexed to the described in Section 7 above, the candidate City), shall be eligible for an elective office of the j receiving the highest number of votes in the City. The Council shall be final judge of the special election shall be deemed elected for the qualifications and election of its own members, remainder of the vacant positions term. (Measure subject, however, to review by a court of 34-57, November 5, 1996 election, Res. 96-54; competent jurisdiction. C-2 SFICode Update: 01100 41 r~ ~YY~rt t _h. r t t ' ~ i ` ~ ,~'xr ~ a.-..., •S~~~,~vf~~ r~.A~~l~. ~y ~ t,~, C 'r. F ~~~F ~ y, 'M ~fGrn 1 / RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACI3RACH, L.cP 1 ATTORNEYS AT tAW 1727 N.W. Hoyt sweet MEMORANDUM PanlwW, Oregon 97209 a (503) 222-4402 { Acc: (503) 243.2944 r i ~ r TO: Tigard City Council and William A. Monahan, City Manager FROM: Timothy V. Ramis, City Attorney DATE: July 11. 2000 f RE: Mayoral Position The recent passing of Mayor Nicoli creates a vacancy in the mayoral position on the City Council. This memo will provide the City with the legal requirements and the options available for filling this vacancy. cancv By operation of the Charter, the position of Mayor is now vacant. Section 32 of the Tigard Charter states that an office shall be deemed vacant upon the incumbent's death. Council President a Brian Moore is the current Council President. This person is chosen at the first meeting of each odd F' numbered year. Section 18 of the City's Charter states that, y "Whenever the mayor is physically or mentally unable to perform the functions of office, the 0o president shall act as the mayor pro tem." The Council President has been signing documents and performing the functions of the Mayor's office when Mayor Nicoli was not available. Under the Charter this can continue. The Council need not take formation action to appoint the Council President as Mayor Pro Tem. It may do so if it wishes. Memorandum re: Mayoral Position July 11, 2000 ` Page 3 L V 3. Hold an election at a date other than November 2000, The Courgcil would •hiv*49 hold an election at some point, but could choose a later election date. With this option, the Council may choose to appoint a person who: a. Promises not to run for Mayor at the later election date, or b. May choose to run for Mayor at the later election date. Or, the Council may choose to leave the position vacant until the election is held. Charter Section 7 states that, "In the event the office of mayor becomes vacant before the normal expiration of its term a special election may be held at the next available date to fill the office for the unexpired term." Again, as the word "may" indicates, holding a special election at the next available date is not mandatory. 4. Fill the vacancy by appointment for the remainder of the term and hold no election until November 2002. 9 e 5. Do nothing; operating with a four-person Council, until the November 2002 election. , Filling j jMral Position by Election As discussed above, the Council may hold a special election at the next available date to fill the mayoral position for the unexpired term. However, this is not a required action. Mayor Nicoli's term expires December 31, 2002. If an election is held in November 2000, the person elected to fill the office for the unexpired term will hold the position of Mayor for approximately two years. The next available election is November 7, 2000. The County Clerk's deadline for filing at this election is September 7, 2000. Therefore, the City's deadline for the mayoral position, as required by TMC §2.40.030 is, August 7, 2000. .,i.. ~i'• t xa r5. s F.r ~ F JAr ..rr. i~.i r 1 r .r y 6u r.•,~ ui"~"~i"! d r rr ¢ n b r, ~ .1, r LY ,5. sr,, rt r.1,`= -a '.7 r a.r Y f u r. t ,i , w. I2 < •i:i *,i., Memorandum re: Mayoral Position July 11, 2000 Page 2 If the Council President becomes Mayor Pro Tem, the Council may appoint a new Council President to serve until the first meeting of 2001, at which time a new Council President will be elected by the Council for a two year term. The Charter is silent as to whether an interim appointment for Council President is required if the currem Council President becomes Mayor Pro Tem. The Council may wait until the first meeting of 2001 to elect a new Council President, but would have no acting Council President in the instance the Mayor Pro Tem is absent from a meeting. Filliog, MWral_ Position Vacancy There are numerous options to choose from for filling the vacant mayoral position. The Council may fill the vacancy by appointment or by election. It may choose to fill the vacancy on an interim basis or leave the seat unfilled until an election is held. The Charter does not preclude leaving the seat unfilled until the end of the term. The vacancy may be filled by an election, by interim appointment until an election can be held, or by appointment for the remainder of the term, with variations on each option: 1. Do not fill the vacancy until a person can be elected at the November 2000 election to fill remaining term. Section 7 of the Charter states that, "The council may appoint a person to fill a vacancy until an election can be held." As the word "may" indicates, filling the vacancy by appointment is not a mandatory action. 2. Fill the vacancy with an interim person until a person can be elected at the November 2000 election to fill remaining term. With this option the Council can choose to appoint a person who: C a. Promises not to run for Mayor at the November 2000 election, or b. - May choose to run for Mayor at the November 2040 election. v The Council could also opt to hold an election in November 2000, but not fill the vacancy until j after August 7, 2000 (the filing deadline for mayoral candidates for the November election), thus assuring that the appointee will not run for Mayor in November. i i I! ii.i' $Mt ?.tii t'Y Y 4 x~~4 1`L ..Z'r N.~, ~j} , il.,t «t, ~ni.~!i 31'I~ . .•,tn5'~.. J ,~?t,i. 7•,`x v..lh ,i~". .j Memorandum re: Mayoral Position July 11, 2000 Page 4 In order for current Council members to be candidates for the mayoral position at the November 2000 , election, they must resign from their current office at the time of filing for the mayoral role. Such ; resignation cannot be withdrawn. The resignation shall provide for termination of the signer's service in the office not later than the last day before service would begin in the office for which that person sought to be a candidate. i Charter Section 7 provides for term limits for all Council positions. It states that no person shall serve on the City Council for more than twelve consecutive years. Filling a vacancy does not count toward the 12 consecutive year limit. Furthermore, filling a vacancy does not start over the 12 consecutive year time limit, unless there is a break in service. Based on the 12 consecutive year time limit, all current Council members are eligible to run for Mayor in the November 2000 election. Filling Mayoral Position Vacancy by Appointment As discussed above, the Council may fill the vacant mayoral position by appointment. However, appointment is not required. As noted above, the Council may also appoint on an interim basis until an election is conducted. If the Council chooses to appoint someone to fill the mayoral position vacancy, a process for choosing the appointee will have to be agreed on. Interviews are not required, but if interviews are held, they may not be held in executive session. Effect of Election or Appointment of Current City-Council Member on the City Council If a current City Council member chooses to run for Mayor, that person must resign from their current position as discussed above. Their current position becomes vacant on the effective date of the resignation or on the last day of service before they take office as Mayor. If a current City Council member is appointed to the mayoral position, their current position becomes vacant on the effective date of appointment. Filling the vacancies left by the election or appointment of current City Council members is a similar m process to the process discussed in this memorandum, However, our office would be happy to assist the City in clarifying its options for filling council vacancies when the need arises. W J Tv0xm19M4!nuyorpoeition.rm3 TIGARD CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 11, 2000 • STUDY SESSION > Council President Moore called meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. > Council Present: Council President Brian Moore, Councilors Paul Hunt, Joyce Patton, and Ken Scheckla. > Staff Present: City Manager Bill Monahan; City Attorney Tim Ramis; City Engineer Gus Duenas; City Recorder Catherine Wheatley; Public Works Director Ed Wegner; Associate Planner Julia Hajduk; Finance Director Craig Prosser > Agenda Review and Administrative Items: Bill Monahan, City Manager, reported that: > Staff was pulling Item 3.4 off the agenda. This item concerned an agreement with Tualatin Valley Fire & Rescue; staff was advised that one of the numbers in the agreement might change. > There is a possibility of an issue that could be raised during the Visitor's Agenda with respect to Item 3.5c, the Cook Park wetland mitigation project. > New Library Board member Marvin Diamond may not be attending later in the meeting to be introduced to the City Council. > Logistics for the Korean War Commemorative ceremony scheduled for the meeting tonight were reviewed. > There may be some citizen concerns with respect to the annexation creating an island. He noted that the Council could adjust the annexation boundaries if it desired. > Jeff Munro, Park Supervisor, was leaving to work at the City of Gresham. > Mr. Monahan reviewed the Council-initiated proposal to name new athletic fields in Cook Park after Jim and Dave Nicoli. After brief discussion, the Council decided to move forward with naming the new area after Jim and Dave Nicoli and then consider naming the individual fields after other people as it deemed appropriate by the Council and/or the Atfalati committee. > Discussion of Vacancy in the Position of Mayor Tim Ramis, City Attorney, reviewed the options available to the Council to fill the mayoral position, as outlined in his memo. He noted that the recent change in the City Charter eliminating the earlier mandatory requirements for filling a vacant position gave the Council broad discretion in filling the vacancy. The options included Council appointment of an interim mayor until an election, Council appointment of an interim mayor to fill out the rest of the tern, and the Council continuing to operate with four members until the next regular mayoral election. Mr. Ramis advised the Council that it did not have to schedule an election for the November ballot. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JULY 11, 2000 - Page 1 He mentioned a consideration of whether or not to restrict the interim mayor from running in the election. He noted the September 7 filing deadline at the County Clerk's office and the August 7 deadline at the City. Councilor Scheckla asked if people in the recently annexed Walnut Island area were eligible to run for Mayor or Council. Mr. Monahan indicated staff's findings that the Walnut Island residents were eligible to run for Council but staff was still researching their eligibility for the mayoral position. Mr. Ramis stated that filling out an unexpired term did not count in the term limits provision. Therefore, any seated Council member who had reached his/her term limit was eligible to fill out the unexpired portion of the term. He explained that any Councilor running for the mayor position had to resign as Councilor at the time of filing, although the effective date of the resignation was the date that the candidate would take office if he/she won. lie confirmed that the resignation as Councilor was irrevocable, even if the candidate lost the mayoral race. Councilor Scheckla spoke to appointing Councilor Hunt as Mayor to fill out the unexpired term, citing concerns with continuity on the Council. The Council discussed the implications of the suggestion. Mr. Ramis noted that if the Council chose to appoint someone, then it needed to decide on the process. He pointed out that if the Council appointed a sitting Councilor, then it had to fill the Councilor's vacant position. Mr. Ramis confirmed to the Council that residency within the city limits was a requirement but observed that it was a slim test to pass because the case law spoke to the intention to reside within the jurisdiction. Councilor Patton suggested holding the election next year, as opposed to November, because of the short time period left before the City's August 7 filing deadline date. She said she did not think that this provided people with sufficient time to make a decision about running for the office. Council President Moore concurred that three weeks was not enough time to make the decision. Council discussed whether to appoint a Mayor from among the current Councilors. Councilor Scheckla noted concerns with continuity and experience. Councilor Patton mentioned the option of appointing an interim mayor until they could hold an election. Council President Moore suggested continuing the discussion at the workshop next week. The Council concurred. Councilor Hunt asked for sufficient time on the agenda to discuss the options and to reach a decision. The Council agreed that Mr. Ramis should attend next week's meeting. Mr. Ramis noted a changed on page 3 of his memo from "The Council would have to hold..." to "The Council would hold..." > Discussion about Revisions to the Intergovernmental Agreement Creating the Intergovernmental Water Board Mr. Wegner reviewed the history behind the composition of the Intergovernmental Water Board of four representatives from Tigard, King City, Durham and the Tigard Water District plus one non- voting member-at-large. He indicated that the Board had specific duties in the areas of water supply and capital improvements while the City of Tigard ran the day-to-day operations of the water system. He noted that the other three entities had had no vote on the Tigard Charter amendment with respect to using the Willamette River as a water source. a Mr. Wegner presented the Board's request for staff to return with options to include the other three jurisdictions in a Tigard vote on going to the Willamette. He mentioned that the Tigard Water District requested other changes to the intergovernmental agreement also. He referenced the memo outlining the possibilities of changing the IGA to allow a vote by all the jurisdictions. Councilor Hunt asked what difference changing the IGA would make because the Citizens for Safe Water petition said that the City could not use the water, not that it could not build a plant. Mr. Wegner explained that if the agreement was that a 3 out of 4 vote prevailed in the matter of a CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JULY 11, 2000 - Page 2 MM. Mr. Monahan discussed the determination of the Washington County Bond Counsel that sending both levies to the ballot as separate measures created the potential of a legal challenge, because the second measure would be for the capital expenses of a district not yet formed. He said that the Bond Counsel recommended combining the two rates into one permanent tax rate of 83 cents per $1,000. He noted that the City Attorney's Office concurred with the Washington County Counsel's opinion that the earlier resolutions passed by the jurisdictions were adequate and did not need changing. Mr. Monahan referenced the Council's interest at the June 27 study session in discussing whether it should affirm the earlier resolution. He presented a new resolution, which re-affirmed the Council's request to place the formation of a new County service district on the ballot and clarified that the Council understood that the combined tax rate would not exceed 83 cents per $1,000. He emphasized that if this resolution did not pass, then the Council's earlier Resolution 00-12 stood as the legal document of the City. Councilor Hunt questioned how the County could approve the changed proposal if the Council did not pass this resolution, as the Council had not intended to approve this kind of financing with the earlier resolution. Mr. Monahan indicated that the issue was that the resolution did not specifically bind the measure to an operating levy of 48 cents and a capital expense levy of 35 cents; the resolution authorized the City Manager to sign a memo of understanding. Mr. Ramis concurred that the County could rely on the original resolution in making its decision with respect to combining the tax rates. Councilor Hunt characterized the first resolution as intentionally vague and misleading. Mr. Ramis concurred with Councilor Scheckla that there was a difference between what the County was considering and the Council's earlier resolution. He commented that if the Council saw it as an important difference, then it should go on record stating that. He emphasized that if the Council did not do so, then the existing resolution prevailed. Motion by Councilor Scheckla, seconded by Councilor Hunt, to adopt Resolution 00-42. The City Recorder read the number and title of the resolution. RESOLUTION 00-42, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON, REAFFIRMING ITS CONSENT TO FORMATION OF A NEW COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT. Motion failed by split voice vote of the Council present. (Council President Moore and Councilor Patton voted `yes;' Councilors Hunt and Scheckla voted `no.') [2-2] Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Scheckla, that the Council let the County know that the authority the Council gave to the City Manager to support this did not include a permanent tax levy of 35 cents, and that the Council does not favor that change. Councilor Hunt clarified that his intent was to advise the County that the Council did not favor the combined permanent rate with respect to the Atfalati measure. Motion failed by split voice vote of the Council present. (Councilors Hunt and Scheckla voted `yes;' Council President Moore and Councilor Patton voted `no.') [2-2] 11. DISCUSSION OF VACANCY IN THE POSITION OF MAYOR Mr. Monahan noted the staff briefing of Council during the study session on the options available to fill the mayoral position under the Charter. Mr. Ramis referenced his memo describing the available options and issues involved in filling the vacancy. He pointed out that the critical issue discussed in the memo was the process by which the Council would fill the vacancy. He observed that the Council President served as mayor pro tem and carried out the mayor's duties. Mr. Ramis reviewed the options of filling the vacancy by election, filling the vacancy by direct appointment by the Council without an election, and filling the vacancy with an interim Council CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JULY 11, 2000 - Page 12 appointee with an election later. He stated that the Charter did not specify any timing for the election. He noted that the City filing deadline for the November ballot was August 7. He emphasized that the first responsibility of the Council in this situation was to make a decision about the procedure that it would use to fill the position. Mr. Ramis confirmed to Councilor Hunt that, should the Council not agree on a process, the Council President would continue to perform the mayor's duties until the end of his appointment. He mentioned that the Council would decide about appointing a new Council President in January. Councilor Scheckla reiterated his concern that they would be left without a Council President following the November election, should Council President Moore not be re-elected. Council President Moore explained that his Council term and Council Presidency term both continued until January 1, even if he lost the election. Therefore, there would be no gap in Council leadership. Councilor Patton discussed her concern that the August 7 filing deadline for the November election did not allow sufficient time for the City to provide information to the citizens or for the citizens to seriously consider whether they wanted to run for the mayoral seat. She spoke to holding a March election. She mentioned the option of the Council appointing an interim mayor from the Council or the community. She said that she preferred having some time to think about the numerous options available before discussing the issue. Councilor Hunt spoke to the Council appointing an interim Mayor if they waited until April for the election. Council President Moore concurred with Councilor Patton about taking time to think over the information presented to the Council tonight. He said that the Council would discuss the issue at the workshop meeting next Tuesday. 12. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS: None. 13. NON-AGENDA ITEMS: None. 14. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Canceled. 15. ADJOURNMENT: 10:10 p.m. Attest: Catherine Wheatley, City Recorder Mayor, City of Tigard Date: rrnotincnrfmcctinooo» I DOC CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES -JULY 11, 2000 - Page 13 Association with nothing if something unexpected came up. He suggested funding the downtown manager over the banners, if they had to make a choice. Mr. Ellenson concurred that the downtown manager was a greater priority than the banners in making the organization self-sufficient. Mr. Monahan asked if the Association would pay out the $10,000 estimate for ODDA consulting over one or two years. Mr. Ellenson said that he needed to talk to ODDA about where they were but he thought that $6,000 for the first year was a reasonable target number. He agreed with Mr. Monahan that, due to a manager probably not starting until September, they might need only $25,000 for the downtown manager, bringing their expenditures down to the $31,000 range. He concurred that, if necessary, they could revisit the banners later. Mr. Ellenson confirmed to Mr. Monahan that he would return next week to the Council's televised meeting to make another presentation as part of educating the public. Councilor Hunt asked Mr. Ellenson to bring back a proposal for a specific dollar amount, now that he has heard the Council's concerns. Mr. Ellenson said that they could break their proposal down on a fiscal year basis to clarify where and when the money might be spent. The Council agreed by consensus on the direction discussed. Council President Moore and Councilor Patton each supported implementing the banners. Councilor Scheckla suggested that the Association set up a regular meeting time, date and place so that interested citizens could drop in, as opposed to the Association's current practice of setting the next meeting date at the meeting. Councilor Hunt suggested setting audience participation rules. Mr. Ellenson indicated that the Association encouraged participation in the discussion by any visitors. A lady in the audience pointed out that, although the banners appeared to be a frivolous expenditure, they actually served as concrete evidence that the Association was doing something. She observed that all their work so far has been behind the scenes and invisible to the general public and businesses. Council President Moore recessed the meeting for a break at 1:40 p.m. Council President Moore reconvened the meeting at 1:51 p.m. 4. DISCUSSION OF VACANCY IN THE POSITION OF MAYOR Tim Ramis, City Attorney, recalled the memo he reviewed last week on the rainbow of options available to the Council to fill the vacancy. Councilor Scheckla mentioned the editorial in the Oregonian. Council President Moore noted that Councilor Patton's remarks were misrepresented. Councilor Patton commented that, in her article, Emily Tsao accurately reported the discussion she had with her but the editorial took one comment that she made about there being too short a timeframe before the November election, and implied ulterior motives on the part of the Council. She indicated that while she found nothing wrong with the paper's opinion that they should hold an election, she did disapproved of the manner in which the paper went about relaying that opinion. Councilor Scheckla recalled the process used when Mayor Bishop resigned and he filled in as a Council President until the earliest election date when John Cook won the election. He confirmed that the Council operated with four members until the election. The Council discussed the option of appointing a sitting Councilor as an interim mayor, and what i would happen with the Councilor vacancy. Mr. Ramis confirmed that legally the Council could appoint a sating Councilor as interim mayor and then appoint a Councilor whose term was ending this year to fill the Councilor vacancy. He commented that the Charter language did not give direct answers on the various options of appointing a person to fill a vacancy until an election was held . He stated that, in his view, the Charter provided a general guideline that created a great deal of authority for the Council and gave it the freedom to interpret the language. He indicated his opinion that appointing a sitting Councilor as an interim and temporary mayor did not create a vacancy in that Councilor's position. CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 18, 2000 - PAGE 4 Council President Moore reviewed the questions before the Council in this situation. He summarized the Council discussion as agreement on the need to hold an election, leaving open the questions of when to hold the election and who would be the interim mayor. Councilor Patton spoke in support of a March election over a November election in order to allow citizens sufficient time to consider running for the position. She said that she wanted a five- member Council. She indicated that she was willing to consider someone from the community as interim mayor, if the Councilors could not agree among themselves on an internal appointment. Councilor Hunt noted that Jack Schwab had been an excellent interim mayor the last time. There was brief discussion about Mr. Schwab. Council President Moore said that he supported either a March or a May election. He suggested soliciting that people be asked to submit letters of interest and then the Council conduct interviews, similar to the process used to fill the last Council seat vacancy when he was appointed to Council. Councilor Scheckla reiterated his concern with losing continuity on the Council (especially with respect to water issues) if Councilor Hunt went off the Council. He suggested that appointing Councilor Patton as interim mayor and then appoint Councilor Hunt to fill her seat would maintain continuity. Councilor Patton commented that, while she appreciated the sentiment, that should she consider becoming mayor, she would prefer to obtain the position by election. The Council discussed the election date. Councilor Scheckla mentioned a March election. Cathy Wheatley, City Recorder, noted that the March election could cost the City $13,000 while the May primary election may be available at no cost to the cities. Council President Moore suggested waiting two months and saving the City $13,000. Councilor Patton concurred with Council President Moore. *Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Patton, to set the mayoral election date for May. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Council President Moore, Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") [4-0] *Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Patton, that the City Council appoint an interim mayor to fill the position until a May election. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Council President Moore, • Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.") [4-0] *Motion by Councilor Hunt, seconded by Councilor Patton, to allow the interim mayor to run for the mayoral position in the May election. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote of the Council present. (Council President Moore, Councilors Hunt, Patton and Scheckla voted "yes.') [4-0] a i i *(City Recorder's note: Subsequent to this meeting, it was determined that the only election available to the City at no cost is the General Election held in November during even-numbered years. After, conducting a telephone poll of the City Council members, the Council determined to proceed with a March election. This election would be to elect a Mayor to fulfill the remainder of Mayor Nicoli''sstteerm, which would expire on December 31, 2002.) 12~t lV3 ~,'/~y U n c) 1~.1 c7V~t'~1 ~P-r' ~r'e [ ~ n S iln -Q.t~~>7 - I1~Ltirrl,E2.P/LP d. "s aAu "ai table GL- no-th&,rat Eipc~,~s i')')tcna9.PiL /Y1t~!<<-e- Koott~~v~,c: -t.cr`ashCv` CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY-18, 2000 - PAGE 5 The Council discussed the process to use in selecting an interim mayor. Councilor Hunt suggested that the Councilors be allowed to contact anyone they wanted and to suggest that the person submit a letter of interest. The Council discussed who was eligible to vote and who was eligible to run in the mayoral election. Mr. Ramis advised the Council that the residents in recently annexed properties were eligible to vote, and in addition, registered voters in recently annexed areas would also be eligible to run for the office of Mayor. Council President Moore opened the meeting to questions from the audience. Council President Moore clarified for a gentleman that the Council has decided to hold an election for an elected mayor and also to select an interim mayor to fill the position until the election. He clarified that the interim mayor could run for office if he/she so chose. He indicated that the Council would ask people to submit their names as soon as it decided what process to use. He also noted that two Council seats are up for election this November. Mark Padgett recommended that the Council complete the interim mayor selection process by the August 28 filing deadline for the Council seat election in order to avoid someone having to withdraw from the Council race because the Council appointed that person as interim mayor. Council President Moore concurred. The Council discussed possible venues to advertise for an interim mayor, including the newspapers, a brochure and the web page. Ms. Wheatley noted that the Cityscape was scheduled to go to press tomorrow. Mr. Monahan reviewed the process used in 1994 to fill the mayor vacancy when Mayor Edwards resigned, noting that it took approximately two months. He suggested an aggressive schedule so that the appointment would be made by August 22, 2000. The Council discussed Mr. Monahan's recommended process and decided to proceed as outlined by Mr. Monahan. The Council agreed to wait to see how many people applied before deciding how many applicants should be interviewed. Council President Moore suggested that the Mayor be sworn in at the first televised meeting in September, which would be September 12. Council President Moore mentioned an inquiry from Mike Lucas of the Tigard Times with respect to the process. Mr. Monahan said that he would talk to Mr. Lucas. Mr. Monahan posed the question of whether or not the interim mayor had to reside in the city for one year before taking office. Mr. Ramis pointed out that the title of the Charter section was "Qualifications of Officers," and did not address how an officer got to the position. The Council agreed on maintaining the one-year residency qualification. 5. DISCUSSION OF CRITERIA FOR CITY MANAGER'S REVIEW Mr. Ramis reviewed the Council's two options for developing criteria for the City Manager's review. He noted the statute language clearly stating that the Council could not invent the review criteria outside of the public process. He said that the Council could use the criteria existing in the City Manager's contract or determine the criteria at a public meeting at which it allowed the public an opportunity to comment. Councilor Hunt mentioned the Council's earlier discussion with respect to the review criteria. Mr. Monahan indicated that if the Council was ready to finish up his review this evening using the contract criteria, that was fine. Mr. Ramis advised the Council that if it wanted to hold the review in Executive Session, then it had to adhere to the contract criteria. He confirmed that the Council could hold a public hearing at a later date to develop additional criteria. The Council agreed by consensus to complete the City Manager's review tonight in Executive CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - JULY 18, 2000 - PAGE 6 12-05-03 Council & Staff Liaison A ointments Primary (Council or. Alternate or Staff • Re resentative Moore Sherwood Wilson Committee Name Sta ff) Griffith Dirksen ~ Budget Committee c•1 posed budget from City Manager with citizen Committee members. Committee reviews the prop 6:30 p.m. in the Tigard Water Monday evening in the month of May, or and on an as-needed basis during a also the ye Committee meetings are usually scheduled for every meet periodically throughout " j Audi #orium. Council and citizen Committee members council meeting. Prosser, Monahan Dirksen Budget Subcom. - Social Services applications submitted by social service agencies for contributions from the city. Subcommittee consists o Subcommittee reviews one council member and two citizen-members of the Budget Committee. ommittee members for time of meeting. ittee meets for one meeting in March. Finance Director schedules with c Comm Sherwood Wilson Dirksen Moore Budget Subcom. Griffith Events to community events. The entire Council reviews the information submitted to Subcommittee reviews requests for contributions the Finance Director. The Finance Director reviews event requests with the Council at either a workshop meeting or study session meeting of the ~fy Council in March. council/Staff Liaison Appointment Matrix - Page 1 ~Y• ' or Staff 12-05.03 ernate re5entatwe Council or Alt Primary t Boberts Committee Name Staff) Community hecklo * Alternate ers evelop • * Alternate BCC) establish BCC the on all matt Community p policy Sherwood will become the and each of ~,ront Commissioners tdations to the County Block ot when of Boar primary term ends County Board make rectum official, f d Advisory Schecklas Washington Consortium, Bement rh the County generally an electe b130t03~ ental cooperat`on ag pAB) to present epre5entative, member jurisdictions. a r By intergovernm Boo d The PAa includes among policy Advisory rotate ram. - pevelopment the CDSG prog the county 7 M locations pertaining to the cities within month t through efforts in The Board at P n'' eeting the eleven particip 2~ Thursday of he downtown meets the p►rksen o to revitalize the Wendy ately four years a9 Central Assn. Business was f armed approx~m pistrict Association ,c development. at SW office Supply' Business District general eccnom at noon .The Central and e and T Tuesday tin , pro'~`0tions Commissioners rograms. mariO g every other tl ith (library and the Board of meets Sane Sm bet) Services to library p on County The Association Board mern ratwe 4ibrarY relate d ngt b the Wash Barnes county Coope and Priorities d by library d including issues are appointe Coop. the Washington stem, Members the Board. Advis0 goat advises wide library sI 5ervices • to goarthe county' f or library re$entatives library Advisory and Monahan member jurisdictions, erative o erotion of selects Tigard rep among coop concern g and financing locations in p gill on issues ice levels. Manager at various city month. 7 P.m polices, a servCommissioners Board of the= first Wednesday of 'ine The Board meets o~atmerd matrix - page Co 2 uncil/Staff Liaison App LV-0811-rry STRIP Star 12-05-03 Alternate or 4rimarY ~c0uncil or Re re$entotwe and on 'Ounty and endryx/5t. Am with Wash'w +ne comm exam it tee Dame Staff) H Alternate closely k pirksen will also Wilson will work Tas k Force The pawn Force Downtown Task Q2_72. The a'Tas user rail station. c~rculation• Force e5olution V4°.O{ a downtown coin city council R earance vehicular formed by ent and OPP edestrion and needed T . ask Force was developm including P in Town Hall or as to influence the ImProvements. 6.30 P•m- Tr~Met tInfrastructure of each month at Downtown 0 -Thursday o agreement meets the overnmental bY a member The Task Force Sherwood inter. is represented Sdictian Moore and was established District. 'Each 'Uri Intergavernrn members Water Board CtWB) ists of we Ond the Tigard Out other Water Board cons to carry ental Water and King water The issues and Intergovernm of Tigard. Durhom+ council on een the cities o large. Ti Ord city betyyOne member is appointed at recom ations to the g and to make mend Building. Dec 04 Purpose of the Iwth in the agreement. .30 P.m.. Tigard Water Jan - June 04 Wilson responsibilities set f° of the month. 5 03 ies e5dny July ~ Dec Sherwood interested in meets the 2nd Wedn Jan June 03 pirk$en d interview individuals to the Goun ratification. Board 02 Moore view OPPlications ell f or The July . Dec the Ash re orw ApPt. heckla rotation schedule) . T IS f °rded early evening in com• o six-month ee recommendations s are usually Adviso are on commits Meeting councilors The Advisory Mayor and council Member- The MOYor & a Cot. ee laPPointment . a board or comjnitt . eS to fit schedule of the M es PP°'ntMe0 lm i lall. aran r g ° e Conference P-00 at City crere ointmQn~ N~°triX ' page 3 Council/Staff ~oaeson App 12-Q5-03 staff Alternate or Primary (Council or R^ resentative a guide ittee Name Staff) Commi ed ttee will lanes- Comm The ber Advisory ana9 a 217 Moore The 19-rnem 5e and m being Metro Hlghw y idor. The study is 2i7 Corr including general potions. policy the Nlghway • lanes it °P Policy Advisory trans the policy Study Committee eats ►n additional providing The gdviso rovem roads and and Beaverton. of the study, mittee on look anon imp of Options for ord. tronsP°'"t variety too 9 on County. T'9. At the end olicy Advisory C0months dune and evaluate a Connections to of M the Joint ected to take 18 T as, . force pr0gr°m to d~ derpimProvi artnersng interchOOQT, Tr1et Vas all m °lementa ion Pi°e oducts G work 15 ex'P war hiP with d will review On' mmittee prof study will alo{Q0 in P each milestone an eats and o M? ut at d a set of improve m ortati C Conducted b s° will eprovide comme' ,and the Oregon Transp Commute Caramittee will re etro Counc the study . gdv15° ortation, the M 12 times during TransP ber 2000 otely 2003 - N°vem meet apProxlsc+ Task Farce will be schedule to usually a The deBruyn members arund also heckia primary ices meets area the Commission. AT&T for cable sere Treasurer) Metropolitan a sea t on with president Hof the Executive unications Commission has the Vice Pes Comm ove Committee (the president, and the review CC) Communications Commission tMA area body that budget ber o f the MetroP°liton CC is the governing -The 'Execut issues Including 1815 in Beaverton' TVV Public on adm s. Each mem required) MA access TV) • most nisi imeetln9 Counc headquarters ember to°t a Commission MA MACC il m with the Contract ,mendntions to th el and attends m 1 _5 P m at oversees ake recom 1ega1 G°u~ . separately Qom Beery serves Wednesday afternoons pirector year, usually on meets six times a Y The Comiiu plac , suite 6020. NW 169 • went Matrix ' page 4 1/Staff ~,iaison APPp1nt Counci LECIRIL►TY S'iR1P moo . 12-05-03 Staff or Alternate mary ~~ounc~l or Re resentative Pri N elds with the Comm►ttee Nome staff) endr associated 6rif{ith on land use issues Me#ro MpgC) cities within the Metro Technical ittee ( the counti Committee Advisory Comm from AC) es and ation advisory the Metro made Policy up of represent (MT m40) atioThe n Committee is involved- and makes recom also coups are MTAC reviews pion (Metro 20 a m at Metro Metro f unctional envies and special lnr cf the month, 9-.30 region. 5ta#e 9 st and 3`d Wednesdays Y(nlternate) Washington MTAC meets the 1 G,;{{ith (alternate) Hendr' mayor was elected °s alternate by attend . Metro Policy ittee re$entatives Mayor cannot AC) etings if the sor"! Comm of elected rep e Advi(Mp is made UP Hendryx offends m except it Director TAC above, ment Community Develop MP AC is similar on M at Metro • County .urisdict' S_7 P.M. 2 through and ~4`h Wednesdays, the knowledge gained M°nahan expansion Committee. Team MPAC meets the rspective and library is pirk$en provide citizen pe , ~ibrarY thot the finished Committee and the previous to ensure unity regarding the 47) is to New 4ibra'T olution 02- n team comet sta Team ll Res action Co the design the library Resource ff (formed by C°unc City Council and t to th ~ibrarY Cons" architects and the City community NeW Tigard ord lbbrarY staff . updates to the of this group The mission on the with Tig s may PrOV~de Pnformation f rov, in the Ubrary rior involvement expertise Team member also coney 6:30 P.m their p will share their .Merests• They may on Mondays at members of community ruction process. hove net representative and cons In the Past, they progress of planning eats periodically as needed Resource Team m • meet Matrix - Po9e 5 itl5taff Liaison App°int Counc ■ nn rrv.r■w ■ ■ v 12-o-03 Primary (Council or Alternate or Staff Committee Name Staff) Pe resentative Sherwood Regional Water Moore We ner appointee to this group represents the metro wren. consortium The Councilor d of all water suppliers in the Portland jai nsortium is comprise is studying the potent Bull Run Regional Water Agency. CO city on regional policy issues. A subgroup representative) attends a quarterly meeting field at Metro- The Policy board member (our water Senior Center Mills ontracts and Fishes which Board programs- Center Board. The Senior Censtaf terfB oordcates volunteers who run Bui ding. Senior on the Senor Loreen Mills represents the Center city Staff and provides the food. le9e The city provide the Senior Center pays salaries of Senior with programs is also received from Portland Community Center- Board M. at the Senior Board meets 2nd Tuesday of the month from 10 a.m.-12 p. Tigard Chamber of Monahan - (ex officio) and to city policies and status of r Commerce Board member to serve as resource to the Chamber Board with reg ill Monahan is anon-voting board matters of interest to the chamber and business community. Chamber office from 11:30 a.m.-1:30 P.M. The Board meets the second Wednesday of the month at the Council/ Staff Liaison Appointment Matrix - Page 6 12-05-03 Committee Name Primary (Council or Alternate or Staff Staff) Representative Transportation Dirksen Wilson Financing Strategies Task Force The Task Force was formed by Resolution No. 01-06 to evaluate the election results of the failed Transportation Bond Measure (November 2000 ballot) and determine the reasons the bond failed. Transportation infrastructure needs remain and must be addressed to accommodate the existing and future travel demands of the automobile and alternate modes of transportation. The Task Force is to explore feasible funding strategies and develop recommendations to the City Council. The Task Force will determine actions required to enhance the passage of any future funding measures, including the public process essential for enhancing public awareness and support of the projects. Based on Council direction, the Task Force is to spearhead efforts to further develop and implement strategies with the goal of funding a transportation improvement package. Future meetings of the Task Force are dependent upon the outcome of Street Maintenance Fee discussion and review by Council. Vision Task Force Moore (VTF) Beginning in 1996 and throughout 1997, the Vision Task Force established a process to define a vision for the Tigard community. Then they identified the resources for implementing that vision through a partnership of individuals and organizations. The Task Force periodically reviews the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow document. The Task Force meeting schedule for the next several years is as follows: In January or February of 2003, staff will present the annual report to the Council. In the regular report process for 2003, staff will meet with Action Committees in Oct./Nov. and then publish the annual report for January '04. Vision renewal will occur in 2004. The Vision Task Force Vision will review white papers and gather information for a citywide survey March-April '04. The survey will be conducted in May '04 and analyzed. Council will receive a written report on the survey results on September 14, 2004. VTF will review and update the directions and goals from September 20, 2004 - October 22, 2004. The Action Committees will then develop action plans October 25 - November 19, 2004. From Monday, November 22 - Friday, December 17, the Vision Plan will be written to will include the 2004 accomplishments plus the 2004 renewal information. Council/Staff Liaison Appointment Matrix - Page 7 12-05-03 Committee Name Primary (Council or Alternate or Staff Staff) Re resentative Orr Rohlf -Budget Washington County Monahan Committee/Citizen Consolidated Rep Communications Com. agenc 'dated Communications Agency (WCCCA) is the 9-1-1 Dispatch Center for all ~obinel usfeNorth PI iesns, in ities of Beaverton, Hillsboro, The Washington County Consols Washington County except Forest Grove police Dept. Members include the c Gaston, Tigard, Tualatin, King City, Sherwood, and Durham. each Th membership consists of voting and non-voting members. representative O erep ntati one alternative The Board governs WCCCA and one primary Ian, adoption of participating jurisdiction constitutes the Board. Each jurisdiction appoints work board is responsible for the agency strategic plan, alb'approvalbof contracts (over $50,000) as representative. The ectives and general policy guidelines and performance standards, adoption of the nnnu budget, authorized by voting Board administrative directive. The Budget committee reviews the proposed budget and makes recommendations to the WCCCA Commission. 17911 (March, June, September, and December) on the third Thursdays, 4 p.m. at WCC _ The Commission meets quarterly NW Evergreen Parkway, Beaverton. ee meets two times a year. For 2003, these meetings will be held in March and April. The Budget Cornmitt Council/Staff Liaison Appointment Matrix - Page 8 12-05-03 (Council or Alternate or Staff Primary Re resentative committee Name Staff) Duenas Ito County &riffith Washingt Coordinating CCC) ro ects and provides a forum for discussion on Committee fans and p j positions of consensus on land use or land use and transportation issues, Plan on the Major roach when appropriate. Establishes c! f`c authority WCCC reviews and comments on may overnments. The Committee has spe . e resulting in recommendations for atan bounty's local g de Traffic Impact fee ('1'IF) Program then Washing the Countyw and transportation issues among ram (MSTIP) and the City Council of the cities of Transportation Improvement Prog inted by Banks, Sherwood and Streets alternate (IV Cornelius, Durham, AC will The voting elected representatives or an King City, Gaston, representatives to JPAC and MP membership consists of TualafiinI Forest Grove, C King ounty o, North Plains, hin9ton on ard, County. Washington County and cities of Was Hillsboro, Tigard, Wilsonville, and Washingt be on the policy body. Hall. meets the second Monday at noon at Beaverton City The WCCC Sherwood Willamette Water Moore Wegner Supply Agency (WWSA) otential uses of Willamette River water. WWSA coordinates, from a regional perspective, p irre ular basis. One public meeting was held 2002 WWSA meets on an 9 f Liaison Appointment Matrix - Page 9 Council/Staf 12-05-03 Committee Name_ Primary (Council or Alternate or Staff Staff) Re resentative Festival of Balloons Moore, Deveny, Plannin Committee We ner, Wheatley This is a planning and coordination group for the Balloon Festival held in June. chedules. Periodic meetings scheduled festival. of Committee Committee Subcommittee members on meetings s of the Balloon Festival (public safety. For meetings of the Committeestaff hc post-balloon for January - Jur= with one follow-up meeting logistics, entertainment) are held as needed and report progress to the overall planning group. Mayor Griffith's Griffith Meeting of City and County Elected Officials (Informal) Elected officals from other jurisdictions meet with Mayor Griffith. Members set agenda for topics of mutual interest. This roup meets on the third Friday of each month, 7 a.m., in the Red Rock Creek Conference Room. 9 Metro - Various Meetings as we are notified Council/Staff Liaison Appointment Matrix - Page 10 LC41t31Ll I T 5 t KIr 12-05-03 Primary (Council or Alternate or Staff Committee Name staff) Re resentative Griffith Hendryx Tualatin Basin Natural Resource Coordinating Committee (Goal 5) ram, The county and This Committee is responsible for providing policy direction for the completion of °Re r esentatovels5ncl de elected officials cities within the county are developing a common approach to Metro's Goal 5 program. from the county and cities. The TBNRC meets the second Monday of the month, 1 p.m., at the Beaverton Library. Moore Roberts Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge - Visitors Center Fundraising Cam ai n soliciting to build a visitor's center. corporate donations The focus o assist in fundraising efforts to capture federal funding in 2003 Th on providing the required 5010 match for the project by focusing o Task group was Force f was formed the I This group has not been active since its initial meeting. Council/Staff Liaison Appointment Matrix - Page 11 12-05-03 Committee Name Primary (Council or Alternate or Staff Staff) Re resentative Sherwood Westside Economic Wilson Alliance the needs of the Westside of the Portland, Oregon Cmetr°N ~h regio Shecoad The Westside and Economic the Alliance cities is of focused on Beaverton, Cornelius, Durham, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King Washington county Tigard, Tualatin and Wilsonville. bers on environment conducive to business growth.mQte and visib'~ ity of the aryea as an The Alliance`s primary pureose is to creato an romote and enhance the `9 the Alliance strives to p issues uniquely affecting the Westside, Economic Alliance is a proactive organization working to confront and influence decisions economic development locale. The Westside on policies and regulations impacting the economic vitality of the area. at 7:30 a.m. The meeting locations vary within Breakfast forum meetings are usually held an the 3rd Thursday of the month Washington County. I:NADMcp,VKY\COUNCILWPPTMATRIX\APPTMATRWITH DESCRIPTION-DOC council/staff Liaison Appointment Matrix - Page 12 Stta.dLl S e-S lI dF n 12 - I (o - 03 ancdo cLf from 23/'// Nm a hdn City of Tigard > City Hall > Boards & Committees > Skate Park Task Force Page 1 of 4 i Home welcome to the City of 71igi•rrl, Oregon Search Search for... R" Ig ~!11 0M t_ Home Home > City Hall > Boards & Committees > Skate Park Task Force Bid Advertisements :.City Council agenda Mayor Griffith, Huge Supporter of Tigard's FAQ Cityscape Newsletter Skatepark Passes Away Frequently asked questions answe Construction In Tigard Mayor Griffith's family has requested that Development Code contributions can be made to the Tigard Skate A New Skate Park for rl Where did the idea of a skate par{ z. Events Calendar Park Fund at City Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd., originate? Get the background del Forms Tigard, OR 97223. a3obOpportunities Skate Park Future Meel New to Tigard? Meetings, Meetings and more Meetingsl The Skate Park Task Force meets News If you would like to see the skate park built in and 3rd Wednesday of every mon Parks in Tigard Tigard, come to our meetings which are held Tigard Town Hall. Meetings start z :.Tigard Municipal Code the first and third Wednesdays each month at Volunteer Opportunities 7:00 PM in Town Hall. From time to time, we Water Division may hold our meetings at Starbucks on Pacific Highway in front of Haggen Foods. Please check this website for all meeting locations. • GIS Online Maps December Meetings Library catalog- Upcoming December Meeting: WILInet Wed, Dec 17 at 6:30 PM - Water District . Utility Payments Building Vendor Registration Skatepark News -12/12/03 Please note the location and time change for our next meeting. The Youth Council has a speaker Conceptual Design from the Susan B. Komen Breast Cancer 00 0000 01 Foundation coming to speak to them about fund 0 00, 1 raising and we have been invited to participate. Since the Foundation has experience in raising ~.,':fie- -N large sums of money, it will be worth our time to attend. We will conduct our regular meeting 0• ~ '~-*,~1 and perhaps a holiday celebration at the :00 OO conclusion of the presentation. We can move to 0 009000004 Starbucks if participants desire to do so. Cookie sales have been going well. Cookies were sold last Fri. evening at the Christmas tree lighting and at Haggen on Saturday. This Sat., Tyler and Lilly are going to be selling in the morning and Antoinette and Maycell will be selling in the afternoon. They could use some help if anyone else is available--come to Haggen. It would be nice for shoppers to see a few students at the booth selling cookies to promote the Skate Park. January will be an important month for the task force as we invite other participants and http://www.ci.tigard.or.us/city hall/boards committees/skateboard/default.asp 12/16/03 City of Tigard > City Hall > 'Boards & Committees > Skate Park Task Force Page 2 of 4 e consider a name for the park. Due to the Mayor's interest in the skate park, others have expressed an interest in following through with his vision and that interest may create additional momentum as we proceed with fund raising. If you have not participated lately in any of the task force activities, perhaps now would be the time. If you are one of those that will use the skate park once it is built, or if you have kids that will use the park, or if you believe it will be good for kids in Tigard even though you may not use it or have kids that will use it, help us raise the money to get it built. Please don't figure that someone else will do it. If you are willing to invest a small amount of your time, we can get this park built by next Fall. Now is the time for our community to come together to make this happen and there is a role for everyone. The task force meets the first and third Wednesdays of each month and we are planning a meeting tentatively set for Jan. 28 to initiate an aggressive fund raising campaign. The location will be announced next week. If you would like to discuss what you could do to help us out, please give me a call or contact Tigard Parks Director Dan Plaza at 503-639-4171. This is going to be a very exciting time for us. Richard A. Carlson 503-224-0871 rich(@teleport.com December Activities Special thanks to Jana's Classic's for donating 10 boxes of cookies that we can use for fund raising purposes. We also need to thank Haggen, which will allow us to sell the cookies in front of their store on Pacific Highway every Saturday in December prior to Christmas. We will need student and parent volunteers to assist with the cookie sales. In addition to raising funds the sale will attract public attention toward the Skate Park. We were pleased to have Liz Newton from the City of Tigard, Connie Ramaekers from the i Tigard-Tualatin School District, and I representatives from the Police Activities i League and the Tigard Youth Council attend our ! last meeting. Our hope is that we can coordinate our efforts to expand community awareness and increase participation in the Skate Park Task Force so that we can launch a successful fund raising campaign. As the saying goes, "many hands make light work". In order to be successful, the Task Force needs additional student and adult volunteers to assist with a variety of fund raising activities between http://www.ci.tigard.or.us/city hall/boards committees/skateboard/default.asp 12/16/03 City of Tigard > City Hall > Boards & Committees > Skate Park Task Force Page 3 of 4 now and next summer. The site for the Skate Park will be available next Fall. If we can raise the funds, we should be able to start construction late next Fall or the following Spring. But there is a lot to be done in the meantime. As we attempt to expand our membership, task force participants will be contacting everyone who has attended task force meetings in the past to enlist their help. We will also attempt to recruit those that have not yet participated. But please don't wait to be contacted. If you can't come to the meeting but would like to help, please give me a call. Richard A. Carlson 503-224-0871 rich teleport.corn November Activities Update At the last meeting, the Task Force decided that it would sell cookies from Jana's Classics in December on Saturdays leading up to the holidays. Jana's Classics, which is a Tualatin company, has very generously offered to donate cookies for the task force to sell. We are presently looking for a venue to conduct the cookie sales on Saturdays. But we are going to be selling a bunch of cookies. Jana's will donate 10 cases of cookies that we will need to pick up on Tues, Nov 25. Each box holds about 200 cookies. We will need freezer space to store the boxes until we are able to complete our sales. PLEASE CONTACT ME AND LET ME KNOW IF YOU CAN HELP US STORE COOKIES IN YOUR FREEZER. We will also need volunteers to help us sell the cookies so please plan on coming to our next meeting on Thursday, Nov 20 at 7PM at Starbucks so that we can get organized. Skate Park Site Selected The City Council, at their April 15 Workshop meeting, approved making room available for an initial skate park facility of at least 15,000 square feet at the City Hall/"Niche" parking lot site identified on the drawing presented by staff. The Council felt that this was a good location because it's on a bus line, near the Police Department, visible, and centrally located. Although the site will not be available for approximately 18 months (October 04), the Task Force may now begin planning for a Fundraising Campaign. Rich Carlson will be http://www.ci.tigard.or.us/city_halVboards_committees/skateboard/default.asp 12/16/03 City of Tigard > City Hall > Boards & Committees > Skate Park Task Force Page 4 of 4 setting up meetings to begin the fundraising process. If you have any questions or would like to get involved, please call Task Force Chairman Rich Carlson rich (8teleport. co m, at 503-224-0871 or Tigard Parks Manager Daniel Plaza at daniel(&ci.ticlard.or.us or 503-639-4171, ext. 2590. Printer Friendly Version (IE 5.0+ or Netscape 6.1+ only) Questions, comments, suggestions? Fill out the feedback form. Legal Disclaimer Privacy Policy City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard OR 97223, 503-639-4171 http://www.ci.tigard.or.us/city ball/boards committees/skateboard/default.asp 12/16/03 study secs ian Proposed Motions for Council 12115103 ~ t rksen ! 2 - I to '03 1) Agenda item 4 1) Motion to take no action the Annexation Plan as proposed, with the intent to revisit the issue after Uu12004, upon revision of the Annexation Plan. 2) Move to direct staff to form subcommittees (with this council as the overall committee) for the purpose of considering the several issues surrounding the Annexation Plan, to include but not be limited to: Parks, Police, Library, Planning, Capital Improvements, and Street Maintenance. The subcommittees will each consist of at least one member each of 1) the appropriate department staff person from the City of Tigard, 2) their appropriate counterpart from Washington County, and 3) at least an equal number of private citizens to be chosen from those active in CP04B or CP04M, with at least one member each from the area of annexation and from the city limits of Tigard. Each subcommittee is to be charged with considering their assigned issue and producing a white paper of recommendations to Aipsewod be to the Annexation Plan, to be completed and submitted to Council on or before 30Jun2004. 2) Agenda item 5 JJ /1 ~T/ V) Motio o reject esolutio - placing the the ch 9, 2004 ba r the reason us y mentioned. 3) Motion for Council to pass a "Resolution of Intent" stating that the City is committed to placing a Bull Mountain Annexation Plan on the ballot on 2Nov 2004, pending the completion of the tasks previously mentioned. 1' M111111 ! .t~ iiiu '''ge' r~! • ~~i !i)) +.I~~ ~ '1L~! ~ kr~, . •~iiii~ fir?' rd,! f O f,~ UnF~- f. PROCLAMATION Congratulations to the Tigard High School Tigers , Boys Football Team as 2003 State Champions WHEREAS, the Tigard High School Tigers Boys Football Team went to the 2003 State 4y~ Tournament as the 21 place Pacific 9 Team; and WHEREAS, the Tigard High School Tigers Boys Football Team defeated teams from McKay, t Wilson, Lake Oswego and Clackamas High Schools to reach the State Championship game; and ' WHEREAS, the Tigard High School Tigers Boys Football Team won the 2003 State Championship with a 18.6 win over North Medford on December 6, 2003; and WHEREAS, the City of Tigard Is proud of Its youth and close working relationship with the schools in the Tigard-Tualatin District; and t~ WHEREAS, the City of Tigard congratulates the 2003 Tigard High School Tigers Boys Football Team that embodies teamwork, the making of a champion winning spirit and positive outlook of 'illil`a youth In the Tigard community; and . d? WHEREAS, the City of Tigard acknowledges the commitment of the team members, coaches, • teachers, volunteers, school supporters and all those who worked behind the scenes to make attainment of this goal possible;° ►I(r~"±- NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT I, Craig Dirksen, Mayor Pro Tem, on behalf of the entire City Council, do hereby congratulate the: Tigard High School Tigers Boys Football Team 2003 State Champions and applaud their dedication and great success. rylfiiiu,; Dated this day of 2003. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, i have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Tigard to be affixed. . *lr Craig Dirksen, Mayor Pro Tern City of Tigard n1711ii1'i+Y r1 Attest: gi~ City Recorder °i ]jffE 4 J ' LL ~ ^+R 0~ J 'yf / ",,l411 I AGENDA ITEM NO. _ - VISITOR'S AGENDA DATE : DECEMBER 16, 2003 see The Visitor's Agenda gives citizens the opportunity to address the Tigard City Council on any topic or issue. Bz:) Testimony is limited to 2 minutes or less. w If you are interested in testifying on a "public hearing" item scheduled for tonight's meeting, please sign the public hearing testimony sign-up sheet for that item. NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE TOPIC STAFF CONTACTED ~Z,OA) ~a 1 r'1kn 7~4~u,[( Z~ ~r~r l~1ar area NAYS clGJ meaclo~~c7~-i'i7o~/vrhQ.~ 77 VISITOR'S AGENDA Page 1 AGENDA ITEM # 3 . FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Right-of-Way Dedication for Hall Boulevard PREPARED BY: A.P. DDEPT HEAD OK 04- CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should City Council approve the dedication of approximately 396 square feet of right-of-way along the Hall Boulevard frontage on the east side to the Oregon Department of Transportation to provide a continuous right-of- way along the east side of the street? RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council approve the dedication of the property described in the dedication documents to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and authorize the City Manager to sign the documents. INFORMATION SUMMARY The new Library Property and the Fanno Pointe Condominium property are separated by a piece of property approximately 20 feet wide owned by Mr. Fred Field. This property is part of the larger lot located between Fanno Creek and the railroad tracks and is intended to provide access from Hall Boulevard to the rest of the property. The proposed Wall Street right-of-way includes this strip of land plus rights-of-way dedications on either side of the property, from the Library to the north and Fanno Pointe Condominiums to the south. r The library dedicated right-of-way to ODOT along the library frontage as required by the conditions of approval for the project. Fanno Pointe Condominiums also dedicated property to ODOT along their development frontage on Hall Boulevard. Mr. Fred Fields dedicated his strip of property as public right-of-way to allow for the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street intersection improvements. The City is in turn dedicating a segment of this property to ODOT to connect the two previous dedications along Hall Boulevard and provide a continuous 50- foot wide right-of-way along the east half of Hall Boulevard. A map of the area showing surrounding properties is attached for reference. The segment to be dedicated to ODOT is identified as Parcel 3 on that map. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY The improvements to Hall Boulevard meet the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goal of Improve Traffic Flow. The widening of Hall Boulevard provides an additional lane to allow for turning movements while permitting traffic flow to continue on the travel lanes. ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Rights-of-Way Dedication Documents 2. Map of the area showing surrounding properties and Parcel 3 FISCAL NOTES The rights-of-way dedication is at no cost to the City. The Hall Boulevard improvements include funding from the Library Project, from the Fanno Pointe Development Project, and from City Traffic Impact Fee funds. W1q*W4Ourwd sgwd..unrrmwW *1-c4-w y A.d"tion - MI DoJw vd.d« File 6007 312 DONATION DEED CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, Grantor, for no monetary consideration does convey unto the STATE OF OREGON, by and through its DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Grantee, fee title to the property described on Exhibit "A' attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. It is understood and agreed that the delivery of this document is hereby tendered and that terms and obligations hereof shall not become binding upon the State of Oregon Department of Transportation, unless and until accepted and approved by the recording of this document. RETURN TO AND TAX STATEMENT TO Account No.: OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY SECTION Property Address: 355 CAPITOL STREET NE, ROOM 420 SALEM OR 97301-3871 11/26/03 Pagel of 2 -DD /cew He 6007 312 In construing this deed, where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural and all grammatical changes shall be made so that this deed shall apply equally to corporations and to individuals. Dated this day of '20 CITY OF TIGARD By City Manager By City Recorder STATE OF OREGON, County of Dated , 20 . Personally appeared and , who, being sworn, stated that they are the City Manager and City Recorder of the City of Tigard, Oregon, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, and that this instrument was voluntarily signed on behalf of said municipal corporation by authority of its Ordinance No. passed by the Council of said City this day of , 20 Notary Public for Oregon My Commission expires Accepted on behalf of the Oregon Department of Transportation d:/7782shar/acquis/sheiVregionl /6007312dondeed 11/26/03 Page 2 of 2 - DD /cew EXHIBIT A A strip of land, 20.00 feet in width, situated in the southeast one-quarter of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, State of Oregon, said 20.00 foot strip of land is more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a 518 inch iron rod with yellow plastic inscribed "DEHAAS ASSOC. INC." monumenting the Southeast corner of Lot 1 EDGEWOOD, a subdivision recorded in Washington County Plat Book 2, Page 73; thence North 87°39'27" West 846.71 feet, coincident with the south line of that tract of land identified as "Parcel 11" and described in Statutory Special Warranty Deed recorded November 14, 2002 at Washington County Deed document Number 2002-136823, to its point of intersection with the easterly right- of-way line of S.W. Hall Blvd. (C.R. A-130), said point is monumented by a 5/8 inch iron rod with yellow plastic cap marked "DEHAAS ASSOCIATES INC.", as depicted on the map of Washington County Survey Number 29031, and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 00°19'56" West, coincident with said easterly right-of-way established easterly in direction, a perpendicular distance of 30.00 feet from the monumented centerline of aforementioned S.W. Hall Blvd., a distance of 19.79 feet to a 5/8 inch iron rod with yellow plastic cap marked "ALPHA ENG. INC." said iron rod with yellow plastic cap is called as the beginning point in the boundary description of that Donation Deed recorded May 30, 2003 in Washington County Document 2003-087661 and marks the northwesterly corner of said described boundaries; thence South 87°39'27" East, coincident with the northerly boundary line of said tract described in Document No. 2003-087661, a distance of 20.01 feet to a point situated easterly in direction, a perpendicular distance of 20.00 feet from aforementioned easterly right-of- way; thence North 00°19'56" East, parallel with said easterly right-of-way, 19.79 feet to the south line of aforementioned "Parcel 11"; thence South 87°39'27" West, coincident with said South line, 20.01 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 396 square feet of land. Expires 12131104 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR OREGON AUGUST 22. 1975 ROGER W. MORELAND 1033 .EXHIBI T rO A CCOMPA IV Y DESCR/P T/ON Located in the SE 114 of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigord, Washington County, Oregon LEOENO ✓u/y 18, 200.3 EI ices 12 31 04 SN SURREY NUMBER, WASHINGTON REGISTERED COUNTY SURREY RECORDS PROFESSIONAL C.R. COUNTY RaW LAND SURVEYOR POB PO/NT OF BEG/NN/NC MOB TRUE PO/NT OF BEGINNING O FOUND 518' IR/YPC MARKED OREGON 'OeHAAS ASSOC. INC.' SN 29031 AUGUST 22, 1975 O FOUND 518' IR/YPC MARKED ROGER W. MORELANO ;ALPHA ENC.. /NC., SN 29167 1033 I W ~ C) Z Z v o" t O N 30' 30• o Parcel Jl °o IN Document Number Q 2002-136823 20' O I ~ 0 v MOB N 87°.39'27 W SOUTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL 1I ' I 20.01 DESCR18ED /N DOCUMENT 2002-13682.) I I a W \ N 8, ZT iY 846.71 Q h ^ to SOUTH LINE LOT 1 EDGEHVOD N, o ~ o 0 0 _ z p 20.01 2003-0,37721 _ S 87°3927° E _m Oo I C9 W F ~o OB J Q SE CORNER LOT 1 EDGEWOOD PER SN 29031 Proporo4 ay' DBHAAS ASSOr, ING SUITE im - A o. c. covM? 94M a W COMMERCE' aRCLE PHONE 68?-24-50Y070 Prvporod for. PL. A N CITY OF TIQARD SCALE: I"= 20' j 02.644-FREIL, FXMB?.ONC - - i I;;-_- z 2M!M.- DGE 0 v jo c o D1 D Di w Z i = HALL BLVD , -lop o R Ba ogQpy4l8y(p~. 4 8R yy 8R yy21 = 33.8 ~pNO X-N- ♦O Ta 3-s- a § pp N n n_ 0 gg ~ ASS IO NQS I CL 9 ! •'p A 1 n NmR C VQp 0~~~ O 4aR I I NX a ~ I i 4n Q 9 N S. .aa to to ~i j ~ t~ \1 ~ ~ ~ 11 I 099r[ I~ 4 N ' N~0~8pI i ~QO~NOI O 1 ~ I I I Ap I ni I p N ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT HALL BLVD. IMPROVEMENTS 13125 &W. HALL BLVD. OE: 8500331 639H 9-t7t VOICE: 4171 RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION E: CITY OF TIGARD FAX GN-7297 OREM • City Council Document Transmittal CITY OF TIGARD TO: ~I1.1../L~_ ~.1G1 LJ~JLJCAS OREGON From: L?J4.P,t~ L?IL~S Date: I'm sending you: Document Type: ❑ IGA ❑ Contract Other -Z)n~ L9 i Document Name: ~o Approved at the Council Meeting of: Number Copies Included: / cn r ❑Your document(s) have been signed by the Mayor Pour document(s) have been signed by the City Manager 'r ❑Your document(s) requires an additional signature(s) ilaf~uzpG~ A,14~ , file an original document with i City of Tigard F~ecords ❑ Additional instructions: "12 I:WDKCRY COUNCIL%CITY COUNCIL DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL.DOC ~n U Yeann Department of Transportation 123 NW Flanders Avenue Theodore R. Kulongoski, Governor Portland, OR 97209 4037 Phone: (503) 731-8200 Fax: (503) 731-8259 Technical Services Branch October 27, 2003 File Code: City of Tigard File No.: 6007312 Attention Diane Jelderks Section: Donations & Dedications (Various) City of Tigard Highway: Statewide Highways 13125 SW Hall Blvd County: Washington Tigard, OR. 97223 FAP#: NA Diane, Here is the Donation Deed for the property on SW Hall that we have been discussing. Please have the deed signed and notarized, and then return it to me. Thank you for your cooperation and time. If you have any questions, please call me at: (503) 731-8443. ' cer r ( D ! fn -T J. wan. 11 ; j. r } L,1'i;t ightofWayAgent -1980(12-94) FROM v OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Region 1 Right of Way Attn: /haileu~ /2 23 D, 123 NW FLANDERS File 6007 312 DONATION DEED CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, Grantor, for no monetary consideration does convey unto the STATE OF OREGON, by and through its DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Grantee, fee title to the property described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. It is understood and agreed that the delivery of this document is hereby tendered and that terms and obligations hereof shall not become binding upon the State of Oregon Department of Transportation, unless and until accepted and approved by the recording of this document. RETURN TO AND TAX STATEMENT TO Account No.: OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY SECTION Property Address: 355 CAPITOL STREET NE, ROOM 420 SALEM OR 97301-3871 11/26/03 Pagel of 2 -DD /cew File 6007 312 In construing this deed, where the context so requires, the singular includes the plural and all grammatical changes shall be made so that this deed shall apply equally to corporations and to individuals. I AX Dated this __!1l day of Decy,29 bey , 20 d CITY OF TIGARD City Manager City Recorder STATE OF OREGON, County of l 10s i r Dated 1_ ~l~ PM bz-L-) / , 20 03 . Personally appeared v`' C Am n L~~t 0--i rr~~ OA /21!8103 ~utt~ and Z reet A . (,a.S' Ibli , who, being sworn, stated that they are the City Manager an i y Re order of the City of Tigard, Oregon, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, and that this instrument was voluntarily signed on behalf of said municipal corporation by eUtheFil5' 6F GFd*H8H6e 018. pa6sed by the GawReil of D3 said -Gity this ~ ay of ~'t E2Pi L 120 OFFICIAL SEAL CATHERINE 0 WHEATLEY NOTARY PUSUC-OREGON Notary Public for Oregon COMMISSION NO. 371142 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG. 04,2007 04-1/07 My Commission expires s Accepted on behalf of the Oregon Department of Transportation K 0 , j a - 1 d:17782shar/acquis/sheiVregionl /6007312dondeed 11/26/03 Page 2 of 2 - DD /cew 71 EXHIBIT A A strip of land, 20.00 feet in width, situated in the southeast one-quarter of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, State of Oregon, said 20.00 foot strip of land is more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a 5/8 inch iron rod with yellow plastic inscribed "DEHAAS ASSOC. INC." monumenting the Southeast comer of Lot i EDGEWOOD, a subdivision recorded in Washington County Plat Book 2, Page 73; thence North 87°39'27" West 846.71 feet, coincident with the south line of that tract of land identified as "Parcel 11" and described in Statutory Special Warranty Deed recorded November 14, 2002 at Washington County Deed document Number 2002-136823, to its point of intersection with the easterly right- of-way line ofS.W. Hall Blvd. (C.R. A-130), said point is monumented by a 5/8 inch iron rod with yellow plastic cap marked "DEHAAS ASSOCIATES INC.", as depicted on the map of Washington County Survey Number 29031, and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence South 00°19'56" West, coincident with said easterly right-of-way established easterly in direction, a perpendicular distance of 30.00 feet from the monumented centerline of aforementioned S.W. Hall Blvd., a distance of 19.79 feet to a 5/8 inch iron rod with yellow plastic cap marked "ALPHA ENG. INC." said iron rod with yellow plastic cap is called as the beginning point in the boundary description of that Donation Deed recorded May 30, 2003 in Washington County Document 2003-087661 and marks the northwesterly corner of said described boundaries; thence South 87°39'27" East, coincident with the northerly boundary line of said tract described in Document No. 2003-087661, a distance of 20.01 feet to a point situated easterly in direction, a perpendicular distance of 20.00 feet from aforementioned easterly right-of- way; thence North 00°19'56" East, parallel with said easterly right-of-way,19.79 feet to the south line of aforementioned "Parcel 11"; thence South 87°39'27" West, coincident with said South line, 20.01 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 396 square feet of land. Expires 12/31/04 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR OREGON AUGUST 22. 1975 ROGER W. MORELAND 1033 EXHIBIT TO ACCOMPANY DESCRIPrION Located in the SE 114 of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Willamette Meridian, City of Tigard, Washington County, Oregon LEOE/VO July 18, 2003 Ex Tres 12 31 04 SN SURVEY NUMBER, WASHINGTON REGISTERED COUNTY SURVEY RECORDS C.R. COUNTY ROAD PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR POB PO/NT OF BEGINNING LAND TPOB TRUE PO/NT Of' BEGINNING • FOUND 5/B" IR I C MARKED OREGON DefPWS ASSOC /NC. , SN 29031 AUGUST 22, 1975 O FOUND 516" IRIrPC AMRKEO ROGER W. MORELAND ALPHA ENC.. INC.. SN 29167 1033 I Q ~ o o 30• 30. z o W 1\ "Parcel -Y " a ti Document Number ~O 2002-136823 `i ZO v o I I I Q TPaOB N 87°39'27 W SOUTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL a 20.01 DESCRIBED /N DOCUMENT 2002-136823 W \ N 8-,Y9 2r W 846.7> v Q 1 % SOUTH LINE LOT 1 EDGnwoD ai O W ^ - I W p ^ 20.01 2003-037721 S 87°39'27" E ~o • Q k, FOB Q SE CORNER LOT 1 EDGEWOOD PER SN 29031 I Proponrd by.- DBHAAS ASSOC, INC SUITE- Jon - A aC. COWER 9450 SSW. COMI/ETME GYRCLE 5LE; OREtaON 931~A7 N7L5>aNNL(97) W 2450 PIdOwE; PYsporrd for. PLAN, CITY OF TIOAXD SCALE I"= 20' 6s4-stn Extnen o 02.644.118 AGENDA ITEM # 3, 3 0L. FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Change to the Pavement Major Maintenance Proqr= Contract ~~,,lf 1✓ PREPARED BY: A.P. Duenas DEPT HEAD OK ~ ~,a- CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The cumulative total of change to the Pavement Major Maintenance Program contract exceeds twenty percent of the original contract amount. This agenda item explains the need for those changes. Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board (LCRB), will be requested to approve the changes. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the LCRB approve, by motion, the changes to the contract with S-2 Contractors Inc. for the Pavement Major Maintenance Program contract. INFORMATION SUMMARY On August 12, 2003, the Local Contract Review Board awarded the contract for the FY 2003-04 Pavement Major Maintenance Program Project to S-2 Contractors Inc. in the amount of $107,656.50. Completion of the project has resulted in additional costs of $63,736.17, a 58% increase, as summarized in the following table. The five change orders were for extra work not included in the original contract as-bid. The remaining cost changes resulted from work quantities actually completed by the contractor differing from the quantities estimated for bidding at unit prices. Council was informed by the attached memorandum dated November 13, 2003 of the changes and the reasons for executing them. This agenda item submits the changes for formal LCRB approval. Upon approval, the contractor's request for final payment will be accepted. Change Amount Scope of Work Project. Walnut Terrace Change $1,644.00 Walnut Terrace driveway repair. The original Order 1 contractor for the project submitted a proposal almost $3,000 for the work. We decided to have the PMMP contractor do it for this lower cost. w Project: FY '03-104 Pavement Major Maintenance Program Change $3,538.81 Errol St Driveway Order 2 Change $2,179.51 Greenburg Road- Overtime for work crew and Order 3 asphalt plant to work on Saturday as required by ODOT Change $36,837.19 Summerfield Drive reconstruction Order 4 Change $321.00 Greenburg Road - Installation of an additional Order 5 signal detection loop as required by ODOT Net Change $19,215.66 Table 2 of the attached memo shows as-bid of Unit and as-constructed unit price quantities and Price Work costs. Total Changes $63,736.17 Original Contract Amount $107,656.50 Revised Contract Amount $171,392.67 The $19,215.66 net change of the unit price work shown in Table 2 includes additions and deductions to the contract. Nearly all of the increases were caused by four items. In Schedule A of the contract, (Errol St., Greenburg Rd., and Walnut St.) crack sealing was eliminated, reducing the contract by $1,960, and an additional $1,140 of geotexile fabric and $7,442 of additional asphaltic concrete were installed. In Schedule B of the contract (Summerfield Dr.) five inches instead of three inches of asphalt were remove and replaced because the base of the street had failed as described in the Change Order No. 4 portion of the attached memo. The additional two inches of depth required an additional $3,642 of asphaltic concrete removal and $9,350 of additional asphaltic concrete. Other items of work required to repair the base of the street were included in j Change Order No. 4. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED The LCRB does not approve the changes. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY n t: ' Completion of the Hall Boulevard Improvement Project expands the capacity of that street and meets the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow goal of Improve Traffic Flow. ATTACHMENT LIST November 13, 2003 memorandum Table 2 FISCAL NOTES Change Order No. 1, Walnut Terrace, is funded from the State Gas Tax Fund as a separate project. The remainder of the contract is included in the FY 2003-04 Pavement Major Maintenance Program and is funded from the State Gas Tax fund. There are sufficient funds in the project account for these changes. two%2003.2OD4 N doWmro N abOtxt2.16 07 councM fZl& OJ dwVes to pn p cwtrad att.doc L J J J CITY OF TIGARD Engineering Department Shaping,4 Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIOARD 13125 SW Hall Boulevard. Tigard, OR 97223 Phone 503-639-4171 Fax: 503-624-0752 TO: Mayor and City Councilors Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Gus Duenas City Engineer DATE: November 13, 2003 SUBJECT: Changes to the Pavement Major Maintenance Program Contract This is to inform you of the changes that occurred during construction implementation of the Pavement Major Maintenance Contract with S-2 Contractors, Inc. The changes are scheduled for formal Local Contract Review Board approval at the December 16, 2003 Council meeting. On August 12, 2003, the Local Contract Review Board awarded the contract for the FY 2003-04 Pavement Major Maintenance Program Project to S-2 Contractors Inc. in the amount of $107,656.50. Completion of the project has resulted in additional costs as summarized in the Change Orders in the attached Table 1. The five change orders were for extra work not included in the original contract as- bid. The remaining cost changes resulted from work quantities actually completed by the contractor differing from the quantities estimated for bidding at unit prices (shown in Table 2). Also attached is a table showing the quantity and cost of this work paid at unit prices. The quantities as originally bid by the contractor and as actually completed are both shown. • Change Order No. 1 was not originally part of the Pavement Major Maintenance Program project list. This work was added to the contract to take advantage of an offered price significantly less than the proposal for completing the work by the original contractor. This item is separately funded. • Change Order No. 2 -The existing pavement of Errol Street was of insufficient width to align with the driveways. Rather than widening the pavement only at driveways, the pavement was widened along the entirety of street so that the edge of the pavement now aligns with the Memorandum to Council regarding Contract Amendment for Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Project Page 1 of 3 driveways. In addition, three asphalt berms were installed to direct storm water away from houses. • Change Order No. 3 - Closing Greenburg Road for paving also closed the access for a bank so the paving was scheduled for a Saturday. Upon finding that the bank was open on Saturdays as well, the paving was scheduled for a Sunday. This resulted in additional overtime costs for the asphalt plant and subcontractor's crew and equipment. • Change Order No. 4 is additional work in Summerfield Drive that needed to be completed without delay to avoid additional costs and prolonged interruption of the operation of the street. The segment of Summerfield Drive programmed for pavement overlay was closed for slightly over a week. The initial work by the contractor in preparation for the overlay of the street revealed that the street had not been constructed to City standards and that the street subbase had failed. From initial inspection of the street, it appeared that only the asphalt surface had failed. As- built plans showed that the street consisted of three inches of asphalt on eight inches of rock. Hence, the scope of work in the bid documents was for the contractor to remove the existing pavement and pave a new wearing course on the existing base material. The contractor was directed to grind off the three inches of failed asphalt and replace it. However, the grinding revealed that the actual thickness of the asphalt varied from three to five inches. This left a thin, loose layer asphalt that could not be overlaid and had to be removed. The contractor was then directed to remove the entire depth of asphalt. Once the asphalt was removed, a saturated, failed base was revealed. Below this base material was a subgrade saturated in most of the locations within the project limits. Removal of two feet of material in several locations did not reveal acceptable material below. To avoid costly overexcavation and importation of aggregate fill, the road base was repaired by tilling cement into it and allowing it to cure for three days. This successfully repaired the road except for a 150 by 34 foot area. This area was repaired by excavating it to a depth of three feet, placing fabric at the bottom of the excavation, then filling it with large rocks. The street could not be overlaid or returned to service until the base and subgrade repair work were completed. This extra work was not anticipated in the original contract. Payment was by an agreed upon lump sum, except for asphalt removal and replacement that was paid for at the unit price bid as shown as Schedule B, items 8 and 9, in the attached Table 2. • Change Order No. 5 - An additional detection loop for a signal was installed in Greenburg Road as required by ODOT. Memorandum Regarding Changes to the PMMP Contract Page 2 of 3 TABLE 1 Summary of Contract Changes Change Amount Scope of Work Project: Walnut Terrace Change $1,644.00 Walnut Terrace driveway repair. The original Order 1 contractor for the project submitted a proposal almost $3,000 for the work. We decided to have the PMMP contractor do it for this lower cost. Project: FY '03-'04 Pavement Major Maintenance Program Change $3,538.81 Errol St Driveway Order 2 Change $2,179.51 Greenburg Road- Overtime for work crew and Order 3 asphalt plant to work on Saturday as required by ODOT Change $36,837.19 Summerfield Drive reconstruction Order 4 Change $321.00 Greenburg Road - Installation of an additional Order 5 signal detection loop as required by ODOT Net Change $19,215.66 Table 2 showing as-bid and as-constructed unit of Unit price quantities and costs is attached. Price Work Total Changes $63,736.17 Original Contract Amount $107,656.50 Revised Contract Amount $171,392.67 i i c: Vannie Nguyen, CIP Division Manager i:tertp\varcieValten 8 memrandvnskhanaes m the pavement mapr matmenance popram mntrauAm Memorandum Regarding Changes to the PMMP Contract Page 3 of 3 TABLE 2 FY 2003-04 PAVEMENT MAJOR MAINTENANCE PROGRAM ASPHALTIC CONCRETE OVERLAYS ERROL STREET, GREENBURG ROAD, WALNUT STREET & SUMMERFIELD DRIVE Pro/ectNo. ST 03-06 SCHEDULE A - ERROL STREET, GREENBURG ROAD, & WALNUT STREET S-2 CONTRACTORS, INC FINAL PAYMENT TOTALS ITEM BID UNIT TOTAL ACTUAL ACTUAL EXPLANATION NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT QUANTITIES TOTALS 1 MOBILIZATION L.S. $6,100.00 $6100.00 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S. $725.00 $725.00 3 DUST & EROSIONISEDIMENTATION CONTRi L.S. $400.00 $400.00 4 CONSTRUCTION AREA SIGNS L.S. $500.00 $500.00 5 TEMPORARY BARRICADE CrYPE III 2 EA. $235.00 $470.00 4 $940.00 WALNUT STREET 6 TRAFFIC SIGNAL LOOP DETECTORS L.S. $3,500.00 3,5M 3.500 7 ADJUST CATCH BASIN 2 EA. $300.00 $600.00 1 $300.00 OVER ESTIMATED 6 ADJUST SANITARYISTORM SEWER MANHO 4 EA. $140.00 $560.00 4 $560.00 9 ADJUST SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT 1 EA. $50.00 $50.00 1 $50.00 10 ADJUST WATER VALVE 1 EA. $50.00 $50.00 1 $50.00 11 ADJUST GAS VALVE 1 EA. $50.00 $50.00 1 $50.00 12 DIG OUT & REPAIR 40 S.F. $20.00 $800.00 40 $800.00 13 CRACK SEALING 700 L.F. $2.80 $1,960.00 0 $0.00 OVER ESTIMATED 14 AC GRINDING 3,365 S.Y. $1_22_ $4,105.30 _ 3,380 $4,123.60 UNDER ESTIMATED 15 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC 2,780 S.Y. $2.00 $5,560.00 3,350 $6,700.00 UNDER ESTIMATED 16 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 885 TONS $36.00 $31,860.00 1,092 $39,301.92 UNDER ESTIMATED 17 SHOULDER ROCK (314' - 0-) 15 C.Y. $20.00 $300.00 15 $300.00 18 TRAFFIC STRIPE -TYPE 3 D{ URA STRIPEL 490LF__ _ $2,80 $1,372.00 478 $1338.40 OVER ESTIMATED 19 TRAFFIC STRIPE-TYPES(DURASTRIPE) 584 F_ ___$2.40_ $1,401.60__ 584 $1401.60 20 TRAFFIC STRIPE -TYPE 7 (DURA STRIPE)- $2.40 $924.00 _ 413 $991.20 UNDER ESTIMATED 21 TRAFFIC STRIPE -SCHOOL Dl URA STRIPES 35 S.F_ $17,00 $595.00 _ 35 $595.00 22 PAVEMENT MARKING - XING (DURA STRIPE 21 S.F. $12.00 $252.00 21 $252.00 23 PAVEMENT MARKING - STOP BAR (DURA S 12 S.F. $12.00 $144.00 12 $144.00 24 PAVEMENT MARKING - CROSS WALK (DUR 240 S.F. $8.00 $1,920.00 235 $1.8m.00 OVER ESTIMATED 25 PAVEMENT MARKING-ARROW TYPE Al (C 5_ S.F. $200.00 __$1,000.00 5 $1,000.00 26 PAVEMENT MARKING - ARROW TYPE A2 {D 4 S.F. $36-0.00,----- $1,440.0_ _ 4 $1440.00 _ 27 PAVEMENT MARKING - ARROW TYPE A3 (C 1 S.F. $200.00 $200.00 1 $200.00 28 PAVEMENT MARKERS -{BI•DIRECTIONAL)_ EA____ $240,00 46 $230.00 OVERESTIMATED _ 29 PAVEMENT MARKERS -(M0Np'DIRECTION 32 $160.00 UNDERESTIMATED SCHEDULE A TOTAL $67,208.90 $74,032.72 1:1ENG12003-2004 FY CIPIPMMP FY 03-04112-16- 03 CounciA12-16-03 Changes to PMMP Contract TABLE 2 12/312003 4:33 PM FY 2003-04 PAVEMENT MAJOR MAINTENANCE PROGRAM 7~ ASPHALTIC CONCRETE OVERLAYS ERROL STREET, GREENBURG ROAD, WALNUT STREET & SUMMERFIELD DRIVE Project No. ST 03-08 S-2 CONTRACTORS, INC FINAL PAYMENT TOTALS ITEM BID UNIT TOTAL ACTUAL ACTUAL EXPLAINATIONS NO. DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT CUANTRIES TOTALS OF DIFFERENCES SCHEDULE B - SUMMERFIELD DRIVE 1 MOBILIZATION L.S. 54,000.00 - S4,000.00 2 TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S. $200.00 N9O $200.00 3 DUST& EROSIONISEDIMENTATION CONTRI L.S. $100.00 $100.00 4 CONSTRUCTION AREA SIGNS L.S. $110.00 $110.00 5 REMOVE SPEED HUMP L.S. ""'$100.00 $100.00 6 ADJUST CATCH BASIN 2 EA. $300.00 $600.00 $0.00 OVER ESTIMATED 7 ADJUST GAS VALVE 1 EA. $50.00 $50.00 $50.00 _ _ _ 8 ASPHALT REMOVAL S.Y. $6,847.60 $10 489.52 SUMERFIELD - 5- INSTEAD OF 3' DEPTH OF GRIND AND PAVING THUS INCREASING 9 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 790 TONS $36.00 $28,440.00 $37,789.92 BOTH THE ASPHALT AND CONCRETE en,er SCHEDULE B TOTAL $40,44T.60 $52,839.44 PROJECTTOTAL $107,858.50 $126,872.16 CHANGE ORDERS WALNUT TERR. DRIVEWAY $1,644.00 NO. 1 ERROL ST. - BERMS AND DRIVEWAY $3.538.81 TRANSITIONS NO.2 GREENBURG RD. PAVING CHANGED FRON SATURDAY TO SUNDAY. OVERTIME $2,179.51 CHARGES FOR PLANT AND CREWS. N0.3 SUMMERFIELD DR. -SUBSURFACE $36,837.19 FAILURE. DIGOUTSIBACKFILL, CEMENT TREATED BASE NO.4 GREENBURG RD. EXTRA LOOP $321,00 REQUESTED BY THE STATE N0.5 PAYMENT TOTAL WITH (CHANGE ORDERS) $171,392.67 PROJECT TOTAL WITH (CHANGE ORDERS) $171,392.67 1:1ENG12003-2004 FY CIPIPMMP FY 03-04112-16- 03 Council\12-16-03 Changes to PMMP Contract TABLE 2 12/3/2003 4:33 PM AGENDA ITEM # 3 - b FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Amendment to the Engineering Design Services Contract on the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection project PREPARED BY: Vannie Nguyen DEPT HEAD OK : A26 -P. Duenas CITY MGR OK: Bill Monahan ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The proposed contract amendment for additional services on the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection project exceeds 20 percent of the contract amount. This agenda item requests the Council, acting as the LCRB (Local Contract Review Board), to approve the contract amendment to date on this project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the LCRB approve the amendment to the contract with DeHaas & Associates in the amount of $177,410.00 for engineering design services on the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection project. Staff also recommends that LCRB authorize any additional amendments which may become necessary as the project progresses, up to 20 percent of the amended contract amount, without further action by LCRB. INFORMATION SUMMARY In July 2002, the Engineering Department began an RFP (Request for Proposal) process to select a design consultant for the Wall Street LID (Local Improvement District) project. The design team led by DeHaas & Associates was selected to provide the required services. The intent of the RFP was to obtain a full range of engineering services for the engineering design, construction staking and construction management of the Wall Street LID Project. The streets included in the project are Hall Boulevard and its approaches to the Wall Street intersection, and Wall Street from its intersection with Hall Boulevard across Fanno Creek to its intersection with Hunziker Street. However, because we were not certain that building Wall Street in its entire length would be feasible, the initial contract with DeHaas & Associates consisted of preparation of a Conceptual Report at 35% design completion and a Preliminary Engineer's Report at 60% design completion. If City Council decided to form the district after the 60% design stage, the intent was to amend the original contract to include final design, construction staking, construction management and preparation of a Final Report. As a condition of approval for the Library project, the City was required to provide half-street improvements along Hall Boulevard and construct a permanent access for the library. To provide joint access for the new Library and the Fanno Pointe Condominiums, the City determined that Hall Boulevard and a segment of Wall Street needed to be designed and constructed separate from the rest of the proposed LID. In the City Council meeting of May 13, 2003, Council approved a resolution amending the FY 2002-03 CIP Budget to separate the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection project from the Wall Street LID project. Separation of the two projects provided the City an opportunity to complete the design of the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street intersection Project and expedite the construction schedule for the project. The rest of Wall Street would be designed to the 60% stage to complete the Preliminary Engineer's Report. Any additional design after that would be dependent upon formation on the LID to construct the improvements. The intersection project widens Hall Boulevard along the Library and the Fanno Pointe frontages and constructs the first 425 feet of Wall Street to provide a common access point to Hall Boulevard for the two developments. To ensure that the intersection project would be designed and constructed expeditiously, a separate contract of $202,022.00 was initiated with DeHaas & Associates for providing engineering and construction survey services for the project. The Library project contributed $568,000.00 for the Hall Boulevard Improvements and signalization of the Hall/Wall Intersection. Polygon Northwest, the developer for the Fanno Pointe Condominiums, agreed to pay the City $118,465.85 for the design and construction of Hall Boulevard in front of their development. The project was approved in the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program using Traffic Impact Fee funding to supplement the contributions from the Library and Fanno Pointe. Because of the requirements involving acquisition of wetland permits for construction of the first 425 feet of Wall Street, the project was further sub-divided into two phases to ensure timely construction of the Hall Boulevard improvements: - Phase 1 - Hall Boulevard Improvements: This project was advertised for bids this summer and now is being constructed by Eagle Elsner, Inc. Construction of this phase has been substantially completed. - Phase 2 - The first 425 feet of Wall Street: Construction of this phase requires wetland permits and sensitive lands permit. This phase is being designed. Because of the need to meet the permitting requirement for phase 2 of the project and to perform additional services for both projects, a contract amendment is required to add the scope of services necessary to complete the design of the project. The requirement to obtain wetland permits for construction of Phase 2 is the one single major work item that causes the significant increase in the contract cost. The proposed amendment exceeds 20 percent of the contract amount which requires staff to bring the amendment to Council for approval. Council was informed by staff's memorandum dated November 13, 2003 (attached) of the amendment. This agenda item submits the amendment for formal Council approval. The following is a brief overview of additional services included in the proposed amendment: Obtain wetland permits: The regulatory agencies want to see wetland permits applied for the entire length of Wall Street. Included in this task are preparations of wetland permit application, alternative design analysis for nine different street alignments, Comprehensive Plan amendment to remove two existing man-made ponds, wetland site assessment and report, wetland mitigation plan, biological assessment and report, natural resource assessment and report, and public involvement. Because of the complexity of the requirements and the need to amend the Comprehensive Plan as part of the permit, the scope of services is increased in the amount of $99,807.00 for this task. DeHaas & Associates will be performing this work through Fishman & Associates, an environmental sub-consultant. - Re-design the existing culvert on Hall Boulevard to allow for fish passage into Fanno Creek. The additional design was required by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife after wetland permits for improvement of Hall Boulevard had been issued. - Provide miscellaneous design and other services that include additional water quality facility for the Hall Boulevard drainage, retaining walls and right-of-way legal descriptions for Wall Street alignments, two separate bid documents for Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects, and technical assistance for wetland permit application. Upon Council's approval of the amendment on December 16, 2003, the total contract amount would be: Original Contract $ 202,022.00 Amendment No. 1 $ 177,410.00 Total Contract $ 379,432.00 There may be additional contract amendments necessary as the Phase 2 project proceeds towards final design. For example, in order to have finals plans and specifications complete to construct the Phase 2 project in the summer of 2004, the consultant must begin the final design using the preferred alternative alignment as soon as possible. There is a risk factor that some issues in the environmental approval process could alter the design and incur re-design costs. Staff recommends that Council authorize any additional amendments which may become necessary as the project progresses, up to 20 percent of the amended contract amount, without further action by Council. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Council does not approve the contract amendment. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Completion of the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection project that expands the capacity of Hall Boulevard and prohibits direct access onto Hall Boulevard, an arterial street, meets the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Transportation and Traffic Goal of "Improve Traffic Flow and Safety." ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Map showing the project limits for the Wall Street LID project and the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection projects. 2. Memorandum to Mayor, City Councilors and City Manager dated November 13, 2003. FISCAL NOTES The Library project contributed $568,000.00 and Polygon Northwest, the developer for the Fanno Pointe Condominiums, provided $118,465.85 for the design and construction of the Hall Boulevard and Wall Street Intersection project in FY 2003-04. The project was approved in the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program using Traffic Impact Fee funding of $600,000.00 to supplement the contributions from the Library and Fanno Pointe for a total of $1,286,466. Project expenditures and available budget are summarized as follows: FY 2003-04 budget $1,286,466 Expenditures to date - $302,300 Phase 1 construction contract balance -$320,000 Phase 2 design contract balance -$19,000 Remaining budget t $645,000 The remaining budget of approximately $645,000 is sufficient to approve the proposed contract amendment of $177,410.00. 1.%engt2003.2004 y cpthall blvd-gall sl Intersection approacheskouncll packet - designlsubmlttal packet\72.18.03 hall blvd - wall street ais.doc N NO SCALE ` w ~ JO I ~ I I A° 0 Library s~~y \ 'MARA ST ~ Hail Blvd/Wal treat ` Intersection- e 1 r project Fanno Pointe Hall 1 /W II Street \ GIN inte I hose 2 ` Condominiums pro r r ~ r r \ I ~ ` CITY OF TIGARD Engineering Department Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Boulevard. Tigard, OR 97223 Phone 503-639-4171 Fax: 503-624-0752 TO: Mayor and City Councilors Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Gus Duenas City Engineer DATE: November 13, 2003 SUBJECT: Contract Amendment for the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection Project This is to inform you of a proposed contract amendment for the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection project. The amendment for formal Local Contract Review Board (LCRB) approval is scheduled for LCRB consideration on December 16, 2003. In July 2002, the Engineering Department began an RFP (Request for Proposal) process to select a design consultant for the Wall Street LID (Local Improvement District) project. The design team led by DeHaas & Associates was selected to provide the required services. The intent of the RFP was to obtain a full range of engineering services for the engineering design, construction staking and construction management of the Wall Street LID Project. The streets included in the project are Hall Boulevard and its approaches to the Wall Street intersection, and Wall Street from its intersection with Hall Boulevard across Fanno Creek to its intersection with Hunziker Street. However, because we were not certain that building Wall Street in its entire length would be feasible, the initial contract with DeHaas & Associates consisted of preparation of a Conceptual Report at 35% design completion and a Preliminary Engineer's Report at 60% design completion. If City Council decided to form the district after the 60% design stage, the intent was to amend the original contract to include final design, construction staking, construction management and preparation of a Final Report. As a condition of approval for the Library project, the City was required to provide half-street improvements along Hall Boulevard and construct a permanent access for the library. To provide joint access for the new Library and the Fanno Pointe Condominiums, the City determined that Hall Boulevard and a segment of Wall Street needed to be designed and constructed separate from the rest of the proposed LID. In the City Council meeting of May 13, 2003, Council approved a resolution amending the FY 2002-03 CIP Budget to separate the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Intersection project Memorandum to Council regarding Contract Amendment for Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Project Pagel of 3 from the Wall Street LID project. Separation of the two projects provided the City an opportunity to complete the design of the Hall Boulevard/Wall Street intersection Project and expedite the construction schedule for the project. The rest of Wall Street would be designed to the 60% stage to complete the Preliminary Engineer's Report. Any additional design after that would be dependent upon formation on the LID to construct the improvements. The intersection project widens Hall Boulevard along the Library and the Fanno Pointe frontages and constructs the first 425 feet of Wall Street to provide a common access point to Hall Boulevard for the two developments. To ensure that the intersection project would be designed and constructed expeditiously, a separate contract of $202,022.00 was initiated with DeHaas & Associates for providing engineering and construction survey services for the project. The Library project contributed $568,000.00 for the Hall Boulevard Improvements and signalization of the Hall/Wall Intersection. Polygon Northwest, the developer for the Fanno Pointe Condominiums, agreed to pay the City $118,465.85 for the design and construction of Hall Boulevard in front of their development. The project was approved in the FY 2003-04 Capital Improvement Program using Traffic Impact Fee funding to supplement the contributions from the Library and Fanno Pointe. Because of the requirements involving acquisition of wetland permits for construction of the first 425 feet of Wall Street, the intersection project was further subdivided into two phases to ensure timely completion of the Hall Boulevard improvements. • Phase 1 - Hall Boulevard improvements: This project was advertised for bids this summer and is now being constructed by Eagle Elsner. Construction of this phase has been substantially completed. • Phase 2 - The first 425-feet of Wall Street: Construction of this phase requires wetland permits. This phase is currently being designed. Because of the need to meet the permitting requirements, a contract amendment is required to add the scope of services necessary to obtain the permits for construction of approximately 425 feet of Wall Street. The regulatory agencies want to see the alignment of Wall Street in its entirety, including an alternatives analysis to show that it is appropriately located. In addition, construction of Wall Street requires a Comprehensive Plan amendment to remove two existing man-made ponds from the Comprehensive Plan. The City's objective is to complete 100% design of approximately 425 feet of Wall Street, obtain the necessary permits, amend the Comprehensive Plan to remove the two existing ponds, and construct that segment of Wall Street by late summer of 2004. This would allow the new Library and Fanno Pointe to connect to a street that provides joint access to both developments and intersects Hall Boulevard at one location. We are also working with Oregon Department of Transportation to approve signalization of the intersection to provide controlled access to the two developments. The amendment to the contract includes the following: • Re-design the existing culvert on Hall Boulevard to allow for fish passage into Fanno Creek. U The additional design was required by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife after J wetland permits had been issued and the construction had been in progress. e Obtain wetland permits for the project. The Corps of Engineers requires that the wetland permit application include the entire Wall Street alignment and the plan for mitigation of any wetland impacts. Because of the complexity of the requirements and the need to amend the Comprehensive Plan as part of the project, the original scope of services ;s increased in the Memorandum to Council regarding Contract Amendment for Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Project Page 2 of 3 amount of $99,807 for this task. DeHaas & Associates will be performing this work through Fishman and Associates, an environmental subconsultant. • Provide miscellaneous design and other services that include additional topographic survey along the existing railroad tracks, water quality facility for the Hall Boulevard drainage, retaining walls and right-of-way descriptions for Wall Street alignments, two separate bid documents for Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects, and technical assistance for the preparation of the wetland permit application. The proposed amendment exceeds 20 percent of the contract amount which requires staff to bring the amendment to Council for approval. Upon Council's approval of the amendment on December 16, 2003, the total contract amount would be: Original Contract $ 202,022.00 Amendment No. 1 $ 177,410.00 Total Contract $ 379,432.00 There may be additional contract amendments necessary as the Phase 2 project proceeds towards final design. For example, in order to have finals plans and specifications complete to construct the Phase 2 project in the summer of 2004, the consultant must begin the final design using the preferred alternative alignment as soon as possible. There is a risk factor that some issues in the environmental approval process could alter the design and incur re-design costs. If you have any questions or need additional information regarding the proposed contract amendment, please let me know. c: Vannie Nguyen, CIP Division Manager 1'^Vvx""etten 6 RWWa tM%CW trxt amerdmefn for the hae and wall poJeadoc Memorandum to Council regarding Contract Amendment for Hall Boulevard/Wall Street Project Page 3 of 3 AGENDA ITEM FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Approval of Library Policies and Procedures PREPARED BY: Margaret Barnes DEPT HEAD OK , CITY MGR OK op-k"-~ ISSUE BEFORE THE CO IL Tigard City Council to approve policies and procedures for the Tigard Library as recommended by the Tigard Library Board. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve attached policies and procedures as recommended by the Tigard Library Board and as states in the Tigard Municipal Code, Section 2.36.040. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Tigard Library Board reviews pertinent policies and procedures annually that relate to the operation of the Tigard Public Library. As it states in the Tigard Municipal Code, Section 2.36.040 Board Responsibilities: To recommend library policies as deemed desirable in the operation and utilization of library facilities to the Council. The City Attorney has reviewed these documents and has no concerns or issues. The Library Board is forwarding the following polices and procedures to Council for their approval: Collection Development Policy Confidentiality of Library Records Policy Internet Acceptable Use Policy Library Bill of Rights Library Borrowing Policy Library Card Policy j Library Use Guidelines Postings and Distribution of Materials Policy The Freedom to Read Tigard Public Library Exhibit and Display Policy Tigard Public Library Public Computer Rules i j i OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED i i None. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY I:\Lib\City Council Agenda Summaries\AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY SHEET-December 16, 2003.doc None. ATTACHMENT LIST A. Collection Development Policy B. Confidentiality of Library Records Policy C. Internet Acceptable Use Policy D. Library Bill of Rights E. Library Borrowing Policy F. Library Card Policy , G. Library Use Guidelines H. Postings and Distribution of Materials Policy I. The Freedom to Read J. Tigard Public Library Exhibit and Display Policy K. Tigard Public Library Public Computer Rules FISCAL NOTES None. I:\Lib\City Council Agenda Summaries\AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY SHEET-December 16, 2003.doc Attachment A Collection Development Policy 1. Mission Statement II. Purpose of the Collection Development Policy 111. Responsibility for Collection Development IV. Objectives of Collection Development V. General criteria for selection Vi. Collection Maintenance VI.I Gifts VIII. Reconsideration of Library Materials IX. Limits on the Collection X. Policy Implementation, Evaluation and Revision 1. MISSION STATEMENT: To provide a current, responsive collection of library materials to meet the needs and interests of the diverse and growing Tigard community. II. PURPOSE OF THE COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT POLICY: The purpose of this collection development policy is to establish the guidelines for the selection of materials in the Library's collection. Its intent is to develop the collection to reflect the needs and interests of a diverse community and to establish a plan for the selection of materials. Specific information regarding the library's collection and guidelines for acquisition of materials is contained in the Collection Development Procedures Manual. III. RESPONSIBILITY FOR COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT: The Library Board has the authority to determine the selection and acquisition policy. Final responsibility for selection of materials rests with the Library Director, who may delegate some or all of the selection to professional staff. Any staff member or citizen may submit suggestions for purchase of materials; professional staff will consider these suggestions on a regular basis according to the selection criteria. IV. OBJECTIVES OF COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT: The library will acquire, organize, make available and encourage the use of all media that: o contributes constructively to the individual's awareness of self and community while providing insight into a wide range of human and social conditions and various cultural heritages encourages informational self education • meets the informational and recreational needs of the entire community 1:\Lib\Library policies and Procedures\Collection Development Policy -revised 10-16-03 .ix#„ • stimulates thoughtful participation in the affairs of the community, the state, the nation, and the world • gives access to a variety of opinions on matters of current interest • assists the individual to grow intellectually and culturally • reflects minority opinions as well as those of the majority V. GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND CRITERIA FOR SELECTION: The library's collection is essentially a popular and informational one. It exists to serve the recreational, educational and self-help needs of the library's patrons. Multiple copies of titles may be purchased as determined by popular demand. The library will not attempt to create a research collection, but will select basic, representative works in most subject areas. Additionally, although an effort will be made to collect popular works by local authors, no attempt will be made to develop a comprehensive local author collection. Materials acquired will be selected on the basis of the following criteria: 1. Current and anticipated needs and interests of the public 2. Accuracy of content 3. Timeliness of information 4. Author's, artist's or publisher's qualifications and/or reputation 5. Evaluations in review media 6. Contribution to diversity or breadth of collections. 7. Presentation of unique or controversial points of view. 8. Receipt of or nomination for major awards or prizes 9. Quality of production These selection standards also apply to materials received as gifts or donations. The Tigard Public Library endorses the material selection principles contained in the following statements of principles adopted by the American Library Association: A. The Library Bill of Rights B. The Freedom to Read statement C. The Freedom to View statement D. Free Access to Libraries by Minors E. Economic Barriers to Information Access VI. COLLECTION MAINTENANCE: Materials which are no longer useful in light of stated objectives of the library will be systematically withdrawn from the collection according to accepted professional practices. Withdrawn items will be disposed of by one of the following means: 1:\Lib\Library Policies and Procedures\Collection Dcvelopmcnt Policy - reviscd 10-16-03 ,J A. Gifts to other libraries B. Book sales for Friends of the Library C. Recycling D. Discarding VII. GIFTS: The Library will accept monetary donations and gifts of material with the understanding that gifts of materials will be added to the collection only if they meet the same standards of value required of materials purchased by the Library. Gift materials not meeting those standards, i.e., those that are out of date, unneeded duplicates of items already owned, or those in a form unsuitable for library use, may be given to other organizations, sold, exchanged, or discarded. Ultimate responsibility for inclusion of materials in the library collection lies with the library director or his/her designated representative. Contributions of materials are deductible for income tax purposes to the extent allowed by law. Appraisal remains the responsibility of the donor. When a monetary donation for materials is made, it will be determined whether the gift is designated for a certain item or general category. Patrons who provide donations to be used for acquiring materials are requested to permit library staff to select specific titles which may meet the wishes of the donor, satisfy selection criteria, and are appropriate for the general public. VIII. RECONSIDERATION OF LIBRARY MATERIALS: As the Library strives to provide books and other materials for the interest, information and enlightenment of all people in the community, there may be disagreements on the merit of various items. Therefore, the following procedures will apply in responding to complaints: A. Recognizing that citizens have the right to question Library decisions, the Library staff will first try to determine the basis of the individual's request. 1. If the individual is seeking information about why the item has been selected, the matter will be handled informally by a professional librarian. Such a request is an opportunity to explain the mission of the Library and the guarantee of our freedom to read under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 2. If the individual objects to the material being available and wishes to have the material removed from the Library or relocated within the Library, then he or she will be furnished with the "Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials" Form, which must be filled out completely before the item will be reconsidered. The material I:\Lib\Library Policies and Procedures\Collection Development Policy- revised 10-16-03 under question will remain in the active collection until a final decision is made. B. A committee of three staff members, consisting of one staff member from Readers Services, the Manager of Readers Services and an additional Management group representative, will review the item in question to determine the Reconsideration Request form. This review will be initiated within 10 days of the receipt of the Reconsideration Request form. After their review, the Manager of Readers Services will communicate the response of the committee to the individual making the reconsideration request. C. If the individual wishes to contest this committee's decision, a committee consisting of one member of the Tigard Library Board, one staff member from Reader's Services and one staff member from Library Administration will then consider the comments on the form and examine the item in question. The committee will seek reviews of the item in question and determine whether it conforms to the guidelines as stated in the Collection Development Procedures Manual. This review will be initiated within 10 days of receipt of the requestor's appeal for reconsideration of the item in question, and must be completed within 60 days. Based on the written recommendation of the committee, the Library Director will decide whether to retain, withdraw, restrict or relocate the material in question and will provide a written response giving the reasons for the decision. D. If the individual inquiring wishes to contest the Library Director's decision, the Library Director will forward the Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials" form to the Tigard Library Board as an agenda item for its next regularly scheduled meeting. The Library Director will also arrange for the questioner to be invited to attend the meeting. The Board will consider the requester's statement and the Library Director's recommendation. The Library Board will make its decision based on the policy as stated in the Collection Development Policy in the Tigard Public Library Policies and Procedures Manual and the Collection Development Procedures Manual. E. If the questioner contests the Library Board's decision, the Library Director will forward the "Request for Reconsideration of Library Materials" form to the Tigard City Manager. IX. LIMITS ON THE COLLECTION: Due to various constraints of budget, space, limited audience and other limitations, the Library is not able to collect many of the following items: I:\Lib\Library Policies and Procedures\ColfeeIinn Development Policy -revised 10-16-03 a A. Textbooks: Elementary through college, unless the title fills a specific need, and information on a particular subject is not otherwise available. B. Microform formats: Exceptions include a limited number of local newspaper titles, the Tigard Times back file and locally produced Tigard- area genealogical information. C. Government documents: Exceptions include the Tigard City Council proceedings, the Oregon Revised Statutes and similar items of high demand or importance. D. In-depth research and/or retrospective works. E. Foreign language: Except for items such as instructional materials and cassettes, texts, and dictionaries, which may be collected, and for materials filling the need of specific user groups within the Library community. X. POLICY IMPLEMENTATION, EVALUATION AND REVISION: The Library Director and the Library Board members will review the Tigard Public Library Collection Development Policy every other year beginning in fiscal year 2003-04. APPENDICES: A. Library Bill of Rights. B. The Freedom to Read statement C. Request for Library Material Reconsideration Form Adopted by the Tigard Library Board November 13, 2003 1:\Lib\Library Policies and Procedures\Collection Development Policy- revised 10-16-03 Request for Reconsideration of Materials Form Date 1. Name Telephone Address 2. Individual represents self organization 3. Title (please include author or call number if possible): 4. What is your concern about this material? Please be specific: list pages or sections: 5. Did you read, hear, or see the entire content? 6. Have you read any reviews of this material? 7. Have you had a chance to see the Tigard Public Library Collection Development Policy? 1 8. Do you have suggestions for materials to be included in the collection to provide other viewpoints? 9. Additional comments: 10. Your comments will be reviewed by library administrators and you will receive a written response. Please note: Your comments are public records, however, your name, address and phone number will be kept confidential. Signature s r y Tigard Public Library Attachment B February 2003 Adopted by the Tigard Library Board March 6, 2003 CONFIDENTIALITY OF LIBRARY RECORDS POLICY The Tigard Public Library recognizes that all library users, regardless of age, have the right to confidentiality and privacy with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted. User records of the Tigard Public Library showing 1) use of specific library materials consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted, by a named person; or 2) consisting of the name of a library patron together with the person's address or telephone number, or both, are conditionally exempt from disclosure. These records include, but are not limited to: • Circulation records • Borrower registration records • Records created to facilitate access to and/or use of library information, materials and services. Tigard Public Library reserves the right to use library records for administrative purposes, such as recovering overdue materials, payment for lost items, customer surveys and other administrative mailings. Circulation and registration records may be used only by a library employee working within the scope of his or her duties or by outside agencies charged with the enforcement of library rules and policies or collection of library property, unpaid fees, fines or other charges. The Tigard Public Library recognizes that the disclosure of a person's record showing specific library use is an invasion of privacy. Circulation records will not be divulged voluntarily to anyone except the patron or someone who can produce the patron's library card number. User records will be provided pursuant to lawfully issued subpoenas or warrants issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. When a subpoena or warrant is served on the Library, the subpoena or warrant shall be delivered to the Library Director or designee, who shall guide the Library's response. The Library Director may consult with the City Attorney if served with a subpoena or warrant. Rationale Protecting the privacy and confidentiality of library users is a fundamental library value. Oregon State Law recognizes the Tigard Public Library as a public body subject to the Public Records Law. However, ORS 192.502.22 provides the following exemption from disclosure of library public records: I:\LIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Confidentiality of Library Records Policy.doc 9/19/03 Tigard Public Library February 2003 Adopted by the Tigard Library Board March 6, 2003 "The records of a library, including circulation records, showing use of a specific library material by a named person or consisting of the name of a library patron together with the address or telephone number, or both, of the patron." This law allows the library to set policies to protect library circulation and registrations records from disclosure. In setting these policies, the library tries to strike a balance between the privacy of the user and convenience for that same user. Adopted by the Tigard Library Board March 6, 2003. I:\LIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Confidentiality of Library Records Policy.doc 9/19/03 Attachment C Tigard Public Library Adopted by the Library Board July 12, 2001 INTERNET ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY The Tigard Public Library offers public Internet access as part of its mission to provide resources that reflect the great diversity of interests and opinions in our community. Internet use will be managed in a manner consistent with the Library Use Guidelines, which are posted in the Library. Failure to use the Internet stations appropriately and responsibly may result in revocation of Internet use privileges, Library privileges and/or criminal prosecution. As with other library resources, providing access to electronic information does not imply sponsorship nor endorsement by the Library. The Library does not monitor and has no control over the information viewed through the Internet and cannot be responsible for its content. Users are encouraged to take advantage of the Internet and to exercise good judgment and discretion. The Internet offers access to many valuable sources of information, but not all sites are accurate, complete, or current. There are many sites that carry information that you may think controversial or inappropriate. It is left to each user to choose what is individually appropriate and, as with other Library materials, parents or legal guardians are responsible for their minor children's use of the. Internet. Privacv Protection: Users should be aware that it is their responsibility to protect their privacy while using the Internet. Interactions involving personal information such as credit card numbers, home address and phone, etc. should be used with caution. Tigard Library and the City of Tigard are not responsible for sensitive or personal information transferred via the Internet on Library computers. Adopted by the Tigard Public Library Board July 12, 2001 I:/lib/Library Policies and Procedures/Internet Acceptable Use 9/19/03 Attachment D Library Bill of Rights The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services. 1. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background or views of those contributing to their creation. II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval. III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment. IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas. V. A person's right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background or views. VI. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use. Adopted June 18, 1948. Amended February 2, 1961, and January 23, 1980, inclusion of "age" reaffirmed January 23, 1996, by the ALA Council. Endorsed and reaffirmed by the Tigard Library Board, October 9, 2003 Attachment E Library Borrowing Policy Borrowing periods, limits, renewals and reserves Borrowers must have a valid library card to check out materials. (A driver's license or other appropriate identification may be used on occasion if the card is forgotten, but should not be used as a permanent substitute for the actual library card.) In order to provide for the efficient and equitable circulation of materials, the library sets the policies regarding length of loan for various materials; limits on the number of items that can be borrowed; renewals and reserves. a. Equipment disclaimer The library assumes no responsibility for damage caused to a borrower's audiovisual or computer equipment. b. Length of loan The Tigard Public Library sets the borrowing period for all materials borrowed and reserves the right to set limited loan periods for particular types of material. Tigard Library will honor borrowing periods set by other loaning libraries. c. Limits Limits may be placed on the number of items checked out per patron in order to give access to library materials to a greater number of patrons. d. Renewals Items may be renewed for up to two (2) renewal periods. Items that are on a waiting list for other patrons may not be renewed. Items may be renewed through the online catalog, by presenting them at the circulation desk, or by phone. Items long overdue are set to lost status and may not be renewed. e. Holds (Reserves) Patrons may have up to 50 hold requests. Tigard Public Library allows most circulating materials to be placed on reserve. IV. Fines, fees and replacement charges Library material is loaned without charge for a defined loan period. Material retained past the loan period is subject to overdue fines. Tigard Public Library charges overdue fines in order to encourage library users to return materials for use by other patrons. Patrons are charged fines for material that is overdue, 1:\LIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Library Borrowing Policy.DOC Page 1 of 2 beginning the first day after the due date. Fines are not charged for days that the library is closed. The charge for lost or damaged material is the replacement cost of the item plus the processing charge. The processing charge is intended to help offset the labor and materials cost involved with processing a replacement item. Charges are not assessed for minor damage or general wear and tear. Charges will be assessed for damage beyond normal use and that is obviously the patron's responsibility. This includes items that are marked, cut, wet, moldy, scribbled on, chewed, melted, have foreign materials on them, or missing parts that affect the use of the item. Items that are damaged and need to be withdrawn from use will be charged the full price plus processing charges. Items that are damaged in a way that will shorten the useful life of the item but that can still be used will be charged up to one-half the price of the item. Patron account charges must be paid within one year of assessment and remain below $5.00 total in order to remain in good standing. Borrowing privileges for accounts that are not in good standing will be suspended until the charges are paid. Patron accounts with at least $25 in fines or lost material charges may be turned over to a collection agency 49 days after the due date. Accounts referred to a collection agency will be assessed an additional fee to cover the agency cost. Tigard Library charges overdue fines and processing fees according to the fine structure of Washington County Cooperative Library Services (WCCLS). These charges are detailed in Borrowers Schedule of Charges. i 1 1 I IALIB\L.ibrary Polices and Procedures\Library Borrowing Policy.DOC Page 2 of 2 Attachment F Library Card Policy Registration for Library Card Library cards are available free of charge to all citizens of Washington, Multnomah, Clackamas, Hood River, Clark, Klickitat and Skamania Counties who can provide proof of current residency. Applicant must be present to receive a card. All patrons registering for a Washington County Library card must show acceptable, current printed verification of name and street address of residence. If a single piece of identification does not meet the criteria, a second piece of identification may be used to furnish the needed information. Acceptable I.D. for adults 18 or over will be: Preferred. ♦ Driver's License, State I.D. Card or picture I.D. with current address. If the current address is not on the preferred identification, the following additional identification is accepted as proof of address: ♦ Dated utility bill or rent receipt ♦Canceled envelope addressed to applicant with a current postmark ♦Voter's registration card ♦Automobile registration Acceptable I.D. for youths under 18 will be: ♦Any of the above in their name or the name of their parent/legal guardian (this does not include babysitters, nannies day-care providers or grandparents). ♦ Evidence that youth is enrolled in the Tigard/Tualatin School District * including: - A valid I.D. or Student Body Card - Dated Report Card - Obtaining card during school visit (ask Staff person for details) Parent(s) or guardian(s) of all youths under age 18 will receive a letter outlining guidelines for library use. There is a charge for replacement cards. (Same Identification requirements apply). Those individuals not eligible for a free library card may obtain a card for yearly nonresident fee. Borrower's responsibility Patrons enter into an agreement with the Library when they obtain their library card. The library card states that "I accept full responsibility for the use of this card. I will give immediate notice of loss of card or change of address." The signature of the cardholder signifies acceptance of this responsibility. The Library requires patrons to present their cards, appropriate identification, or library card number with verification of address or phone number before checking IALIB\L.ibrary Polices and Procedures\L.ibrary Card Policy.DOC Page I of 2 s out materials. Unless reported as lost or stolen, it is implied that a person possessing a library card has permission from the owner for use. Cardholders are responsible for notifying the Library when their card is lost or stolen. Patrons are responsible for all charges until their card is reported lost, including items checked out on the card prior to reporting it lost. To avoid referral of the account to collections and to be considered for a waiver of fees, cardholders must immediately file a police report of theft and unauthorized use. They must then submit a copy of this report to a Library Circulation Supervisor to avoid referral of the account for collection. Patrons who have lost their card may be issued a new one. Printed verification of name and address of residence is required. Picture identification is the preferred verification. Retrieval of lost items is the library's priority. Replacement charges will be removed for lost items returned in good condition within a reasonable amount of time. Overdue charges will remain. I:\LIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Library Card Policy.DOC Page 2 of 2 4~ Tigard Public Library Attachment G Adopted by the Tigard Library Board December 4, 2003 LIBRARY USE GUIDELINES The Tigard Public Library expects patrons of all ages to exercise social responsibility in the use of the library. Appropriate behavior ensures that all customers are able to use the public library for their information, education and entertainment needs. Please be considerate of others as you use this library and observe the following guidelines: • Treat other patrons and staff with courtesy and respect. • Quiet conversation, please. Prolonged conversations, in person or by phone, are allowed only in the study rooms, lobby or any other areas specifically designated for such use. • Children 10 years or younger shall not be left unattended by their responsible adult guardian (ORS 163.545). • Respect furnishings and equipment by using them appropriately. • Respect other users' privacy. • Beverages with lids are allowed in the Library Lobby and areas of the Library where tables are available. At no time will beverages be allowed in or near the book stacks or computer areas. Food consumption is allowed in the lobby. Food consumption may be allowed in other areas during Library-sponsored events. • Please use personal audio devices with headphones on low volume. • Please park bicycles, skateboards, etc., outside. • Patrons bringing cell phones or paging devices into the library must set them to the silent or vibrating mode. Use of cell phones in the library is permitted if the use is not loud. Library staff members are required to speak to those who may need a reminder of these guidelines. Our goal is to help everyone have an enjoyable, successful library visit. Persons who violate certain provisions of State or local laws while on library premises may be excluded from the premises, and/or have their library privileges revoked for up to 90 days. Adopted by the Tigard Library Board December 4, 2003 IALIMLibrary Polices and ProceduresTibrary Use Guidelines.doc 12/5/03 Tigard Public Library Attachment H Adopted by the Library Board January 17, 2002 POSTINGS AND DISTRIBUTION OF MATERIALS POLICY The Library will post and display for distribution information concerning activities in the community and public announcements of general interest to the community as space permits and according to the following guidelines: • Nothing may be posted, displayed or removed except by permission of authorized library staff. Postings and materials for display must be submitted to the Staff Contact Person for consideration. Items will remain posted at the discretion of the staff and subject to limitations of space. • The only postings permitted on the entrance doors are those that provide information about the library. • Posters are limited to a maximum size of 14" x 17". • Advertising by private commercial enterprises or commercial notices will not be accepted. Posters or notices with price charges for lectures, concerts, or other cultural or educational events may be accepted at the library staffs discretion. Lost and found ads, want ads, and other notices of a "classified" nature will not be accepted. • No political postings or materials for distribution that solicit a vote for or against a particular candidate or issue will be accepted. Materials of a non-partisan nature that educate the public are permitted. • Announcements of group religious activities may be accepted, but not those of individual congregations or churches. • Persons are strictly forbidden from distributing literature, circulating or posting petitions, or soliciting funds in the library building. 0 Rejections of materials for posting or display may be appealed to the Tigard Library Board. • Posting or display of materials does not imply endorsement by the library. Adopted by the Tigard Public Library Board January 17, 2002 I:\LIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Postings Policy and Procedures\postings policy.doc SB 11/26/2003 Attachment I The Freedom to Read The freedom to read is essential to our democracy. It is continuously under attack. Private groups and public authorities in various parts of the* country are working to remove or limit access to reading materials, to censor content in schools, to label "controversial' views, to distribute lists of "objectionable" books or authors and to purge libraries. These actions apparently rise from a view that our national tradition of free expression is no longer valid; that censorship and suppression are needed to avoid the subversion of politics and the corruption of morals. We, as citizens devoted to reading and as librarians and publishers responsible for disseminating ideas, wish to assert the public interest in the preservation of the freedom to read. Most attempts at suppression rest on a denial of the fundamental premise of democracy: that the ordinary citizen, by exercising critical judgment, will accept the good and reject the bad. The censors, public and private, assume that they should determine what is good and what is bad for their fellow citizens. We trust Americans to recognize propaganda and misinformation, and to make their own decisions about what they read and believe. We do not believe they need the help of censors to assist them in this task. We do not believe they are prepared to sacrifice their heritage of a free press in order to be "protected" against what others think may be bad for them. We believe they still favor free enterprise in ideas and expression. These efforts at suppression are related to a larger pattern of pressures being brought against education, the press, art and images, films, broadcast media and the Internet. The problem is not only one of actual censorship. The shadow of fear cast by these pressures leads, we suspect, to an even larger voluntary curtailment of expression by those who seek to avoid controversy. Such pressure toward conformity is perhaps natural to a time of accelerated change. Any yet suppression is never more dangerous than in such a time of social tension. Freedom has given the United States the elasticity to endure strain. Freedom keeps open the path of novel and creative solutions, and enables change to come by choice. Every silencing of a heresy, every enforcement of an orthodoxy, diminishes the toughness and resilience of our society and leaves it the less able to deal with controversy and difference. Now as always in our history, reading is among our greatest freedoms. The freedom to read and write is almost the only means for making generally available ideas or manners of expression that can initially command only a small audience. The written word is the natural medium for the new idea and the untried voice from which come the original contributions to social growth. It is essential to the extended discussion that serious thought requires, and to the accumulation of knowledge and ideas into organized collections. We believe that free communication is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture. We believe that these pressures toward conformity present the danger of limiting the range and variety of inquiry and expression on which our democracy and our culture depend. We believe that every American community must jealously guard the freedom to publish and to circulate, in order to preserve its own freedom to read. We believe that publishers and librarians have a profound responsibility to give validity to that freedom to read by making it possible for the readers to choose freely from a variety of offerings. The freedom to read is guaranteed by the Constitution. Those with faith in free people will stand firm on these constitutional guarantees of essential rights and will exercise the responsibilities that accompany these rights. We therefore affirm these propositions: 1. It is in the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those that are unorthodox or unpopular with the majority. Creative thought is by definition new, and what is new is different. The bearer of every new thought is a rebel until that idea is refined and tested. Totalitarian systems attempt to maintain themselves in power by the ruthless suppression of any concept that challenges the established orthodoxy. The power of a democratic system to adapt to change is vastly strengthened by the freedom of its citizens to choose widely from among conflicting opinions offered freely to them. To stifle every nonconformist idea at birth would mark the end of the democratic process. Furthermore, only through the constant activity of weighing and selecting can the democratic mind attain the strength demanded by times like these. We need to know not only what we believe but why we believe it. 2. Publishers, librarians and booksellers do not need to endorse every idea or presentation they make available. It would conflict with the public interest for them to establish their own political, moral or aesthetic views as a standard for determining what should be published or circulated. Publishers and librarians serve the educational process by helping to make available knowledge and ideas required for the growth of the mind and the increase of learning. They do not foster education by imposing as mentors the patterns of their own thought. The people should have the freedom to read and consider a broader range of ideas than those that may be held by any single librarian or publisher or government or church. It is wrong that what one can read should be confined to what another thinks proper. 3. It is contrary to the public interest for publishers or librarians to bar access to writings on the basis of the personal history or political affiliations of the author. No art or literature can flourish if it is to be measured by the political views or private lives of its creators. No society of free people can flourish that draws up lists of writers to whom it will not listen, whatever they may have to say. 4. There is no place in our society for efforts to coerce the taste of others, to confine adults to the reading matter deemed suitable for adolescents, or to inhibit the efforts of writers to achieve artistic expression. To some, much of modern expression is shocking. But is not much of life itself shocking? We cut off literature at the source if we prevent writers from dealing with the stuff of life. Parents and teachers have a responsibility to prepare the young to meet the diversity of experiences in life to which they will be exposed, as they have a responsibility to help them learn to think critically for themselves. These are affirmative responsibilities, not to be discharged simply by preventing them from reading works for which they are not yet prepared. In these matters values differ, and values cannot be legislated; nor can machinery be devised that will suit the demands of one group without limiting the freedom of others. 5. It is not in the public interest to force a reader to accept with any expression the prejudgment of a label characterizing it or its author as subversive or dangerous. The ideal of labeling presupposes the existence of individuals or groups with wisdom to determine by authority what is good or bad for the citizen. It presupposes that individuals must be directed in making up their minds about the ideas they examine. But Americans do not need others to do their thinking for them. 6. It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians, as guardians of the people's freedom to read, to contest encroachments upon that freedom by individuals or groups seeking to impose their own standards or tastes upon the community at large. It is inevitable in the give and take of the democratic process that the political, the moral or the aesthetic concepts of an individual or group will occasionally collide with those of another individual or group. In a free society individuals are free to determine for themselves what they wish to read, and each group is free to determine what it will recommend to its freely associated members. But no group has the right to take the law into its own hands, and to impose its own concept of politics or morality upon other members of a democratic society. Freedom is no freedom if it is accorded only to the accepted and the inoffensive. 7. It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians to give full meaning to the freedom to read by providing books that enrich the quality and diversity of thought and expression. By the exercise of this affirmative responsibility, they can demonstrate that the answer to a "bad" book is a good one, the answer to a "bad" idea is a good one. Mod The freedom to read is of little consequence when the reader cannot obtain matter fit for that reader's purpose. What is needed is not only the absence of restraint, but the positive provision of opportunity for the people to read the best that has been thought and said. Books are the major channel by which the intellectual inheritance is handed down, and the principle means of its testing and growth. The defense of the freedom to read requires of all publishers and librarians the utmost of their faculties, and deserves of all citizens that fullest of their support. We state these propositions neither lightly nor as easy generalizations. We here stake out a lofty claim for the value of the written word. We do so because we believe that it is possessed of enormous variety and usefulness, worthy of cherishing and keeping free. We realize that the application of these propositions may mean the dissemination of ideas and manners of expression that are repugnant to many persons. We do not state these propositions in the comfortable belief that what people read is unimportant. We believe rather that what people read is deeply important; that ideas can be dangerous; but that the suppression of ideas is fatal to a democratic society. Freedom itself is a dangerous way of life, but it is ours. This statement was originally issued in May of 1953 by the Westchester Conference of the American Library Association and the American Book Publishers Council, which in 1970 consolidated with the American Educational Publishers Institute to become the Association of American Publishers. Adopted June 25, 1953; revised January 28, 1972, January 16, 1991, July 12, 2000, by the ALA Council and the AAP Freedom to Read Committee. A Joint Statement by: American Library Association Association of American Publishers Subsequently Endorsed by: American Association of University Professors American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression American Society of Journalists and Authors a. The American Society of Newspaper Editors r Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith n Association of American University Presses Center for Democracy & Technology .i The Children's Book Council The Electronic Frontier Foundation U Feminists for Free Expression Freedom to Read Foundation International Reading Association The Media Institute National Coalition Against Censorship National PTA Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays People for the American Way Student Press Law Center The Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression Endorsed and reaffirmed by the Tigard Library Board, October 9, 2003 7=7 Tigard Public Library Attachment J Adopted by the Library Board January 17, 2002 Tigard Public Library Exhibit and Display Policy The Tigard Public Library welcomes exhibits and displays. Exhibits and displays in the Library offer a means for public expression by individuals and groups in the community as well as enrich the Library by allowing it to serve in a community forum role. The purpose of this policy is to provide fair and consistent standards for the use of exhibit areas in the Library, thus ensuring appropriate use of these spaces in a manner that is consistent with the library's other service objectives. The Library welcomes the use of the display areas by the public, with priority given to the residents of Tigard in cases of date conflicts. The Tigard Public Library is committed to following guidelines for display set out in the Library Bill of Rights written by the American Library Association. In particular, Article I of the Library Bill of Rights states, "Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation." Article 11 of the Library Bill of Rights states, "Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval." Article IV maintains that exhibit space should be made available "on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use." 1. Display Policy and Purpose A. The Library functions as an intellectual and cultural resource for the community. Displays are a means through which the public can visually share experiences, appreciate special interests, and exchange information. B. When not being used to promote library-related or City of Tigard activities or seniices, display and exhibit spaces are available to community groups engaged in educational, cultural, intellectual or charitable activities and will be provided on an equitable basis to any such group which goes through the application process. The library reserves the right to designate and limit space, size, and location of displays or exhibits. C. Exhibit areas are accessible on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use. Those L who object to or disagree with the content of any exhibit are entitled to submit their own exhibit, which will be judged according to the policies established by the Library. D. The Library will not act as an agent for the exhibitor. Artists are 4 encouraged to post a statement about their work, but price tags or the posting of price lists are not permitted. E. In general, the library does not accept commercial notices for any group unless they have a special educational, informational, or cultural value to the community. The library does not accept any materials being offered for sale to the public unless the proceeds are intended to directly benefit the library. I:\LIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Exhibit Display Policy and Forms\Exhibit and Display Policy.doc 9/19/03 O ~9 Tigard Public Library Adopted by the Library Board January 17, 2002 F. Display areas include but are not limited to: 1. Puett Room 2. Wall Space above large print books 3. Display Case No exhibits may be mounted by the public outside of the exhibit area defined in this policy, as they may interfere with other library operations and public safety, and present a cluttered appearance. For example, no exhibits or displays may be mounted from columns or from the ceiling. N. Display Guidelines A. Displays are accepted at the sole discretion of the Staff Contact Person and/or the Library Director. They should be designed as expressions of culture, have educational value, and promote the use of the Library. B. The Library has the right to review the materials before the exhibit is set up. The library will not accept displays, exhibits, posters, etc. which are judged either illegal, offensive or inappropriate for a public library setting (i.e. one that is free and open to persons of all ages). The decision. of the Library Director may be appealed to the Tigard Library Board. The decision of the Library Board may be appealed to the City Council. C. Displays and exhibits will be accepted as long as they do not interfere with the daily conduct of library business and as long as it is made clear that the library does not necessarily endorse their contents or points of view. Displays and exhibits will be approved and scheduled as space permits. The sponsoring group or individual is responsible for creating the display, setting it up according to schedule, and removing it before the next scheduled display or exhibit. D. The fact that an organization or person is permitted the use of a Library exhibit area does not in any way constitute an endorsement by the Library of their policies or beliefs and no claim to that effect may be used in advertising. I:\LIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Exhibit Display Policy and Forms\Exhibit and Display Policy.doc 9/19/03 Tigard Public Library Adopted by the Library Board January 17, 2002 Tigard Public Library Exhibit and Display Procedures 1. Display Procedures A. Persons interested in using a display space at the Tigard Public Library first need to fill out a "Display Application". This form can be picked up in the library lobby, at the circulation desk or found on the Library WEB site. A copy of the library's policy will accompany the application for applicant's perusal. B. Displays will be for a proscribed time with the owner supervising installation and removal. C. The City of Tigard (Library) will not be responsible for any damage or theft that may occur during exhibitor transport, setup or removal of exhibit. D. Limited exhibit space should be taken into consideration when making application to display works of art and craft. E. The Library has one illuminated, lockable glass display case. The dimensions of the display area are 3 feet wide x 3 feet deep x 2 feet high. Exhibitors wishing to use this case must contact Circulation Desk staff to obtain a key to unlock the cases. Exhibitors are responsible for locking the case after installation and dismantling, and returning the keys to the Circulation Desk staff. These cases have proven to be ideal for the display of collectible items, jewelry, and pottery. F. All exhibit scheduling is coordinated by the Display Coordinator. Library exhibit areas are available to the public on a first come, first served basis, and are available to individuals and groups if the Library has not previously scheduled the use of those exhibit spaces. Library sponsored exhibits and displays will have priority. G. It is not the intent of the Library to provide permanent or continuous exhibit space to a specific individual or group. Up to two exhibits may be scheduled at one time. H. Reservations for exhibit areas may be made up to three months in advance. 1. Exhibits normally are scheduled on a one month basis, from the first day to the last day of each month. J. Exhibit areas will be available only if a reservation application is made in advance. Applications must be made in writing using the Library's Exhibit Area Reservation Application. The Exhibit Area Reservation Application may be obtained from the Library Lobby, the Circulation Desk or from the Tigard Library WEB site. Completed application forms may be returned to the Circulation desk. K. Displays must conform to the space restrictions of the assigned areas and be securely affixed to display surfaces. I:\LIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Exhibit Display Policy and Forms\Exhibit and Display Policy.doc 9/19/03 Tigard Public Library Adopted by the Library Board January 17, 2002 Il. Installation and Removal of Exhibits A. Responsibility for setting up and dismantling exhibits lies with the exhibitor. The exhibitor will supply all tools and other materials needed for the exhibit. B. Exhibitors are asked to be respectful of the multipurpose community use of the Library; thus conversations and noise should be kept to a minimum. Exhibits are to be installed with all deliberate speed. Entrances and aisles may not be obstructed. C. Exhibitors may not move any existing exhibit or library materials during the installation of their exhibit. D. Individuals or groups using the Library's exhibit spaces may not install their work prior to the date on which their space reservation begins. They may not mount their artwork in a manner that defaces the space provided. The gallery walls are designed so that two- dimensional exhibit pieces may be hung from metal mounts. Such works may also be attached to the wall surfaces using push pins. E. Damages to the premises, equipment, or furnishings as a result of exhibitor use will be charged to the individual or group responsible. The exhibitor or organization and its members, jointly and severally, assume and shall bear full responsibility for loss of, or injury or damage to, any property of the Tigard Public Library as shall be caused or inflicted by the using individual or organization. F. Groups and individuals using the exhibit areas are responsible for basic clean up and returning the space to order. G. It is appropriate for exhibit owners to visit the exhibit space in the Library periodically during the time it is on display to assure that no portions of the exhibit have fallen to the floor or have otherwise become unkempt. H. Each exhibitor will supply and display descriptive information to 0 describe the purpose, title, and ownership of the exhibit. 1. All displays shall be set up and removed on the assigned dates with supervision by the Display Coordinator. J. The Library does not have space for storage of the property of exhibitors in the Library building; therefore, artists are asked to deliver and pick up art work according to the dates established in advance. Insurance covering the value of the exhibit will be the responsibility of the displaying artist. The artist will sign a disclaimer releasing the Library from all responsibility prior to the display of the works. See attached Display Agreement. III. Responsibility for Loss or Damage A. Each approved exhibitor will supply a complete inventory of the exhibit and the reasonable estimated value of each item. I:\LIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Exhibit Display Policy and Forms\Exhibit and Display Policy.doc 9/19/03 Tigard Public Library Adopted by the Library Board January 17, 2002 B. Items on display in the library enjoy the same security as the library collection and equipment; the glass display cases are locked, but irreplaceable items or items of great value should not be included in a display. IV. Cancellation of Exhibits The Library Director and Library Board reserve the right to cancel any exhibit should conditions or situations, such as a unique exhibit opportunity or unforeseen need, warrant such action. If an exhibit is canceled, the exhibitor will have the right to display their exhibit again, for the full duration of the exhibit time originally scheduled, at the earliest convenience of the exhibitor and the Library. Adopted by the Tigard Library Board January 17, 2002 • IALIB\Library Polices and Procedures\Exhibit Display Policy and Forms\Exhibit and Display Policy.doc 9/19/03 Adopted by the Tigard Library Board November 13, 2003 Attachment K Tigard Public Library Public Computer Rules Posted - November 18, 2003 To enable the largest number of people to obtain the maximum benefit from these information facilities, certain rules are in effect. The Tigard Public Library reserves the right to modify these rules at any time. Rule changes will be posted. 1. Public computer users are expected to have a basic knowledge of how to operate a computer. Library staff can only provide limited assistance. 2. Use of the public computer workstations is limited to one hour per day per patron, in order to provide equitable access for all of our patrons. Patrons need a Washington County Library Card in order to log on to the public computer stations. Visitors who are not eligible for a Washington County Library Card may use the public computer stations by registering with the Library as a guest. 3. The Library is not responsible for damage to users' disks or computers or for any loss of data, damage or liability that may occur from use of the Library's computers. 4. Patrons are expected to be mindful and respectful of the rights of other patrons and to respect staff, library rules and library equipment. 5. The settings on each computer are fixed for general use. Please do not attempt to alter any computer settings. Individuals who tamper with these settings will be asked to leave the computer area. 6. Internet access is open to patrons of all ages. The Library cannot control the Internet and cannot be held responsible for its content. Parents are responsible for their child's access to the Internet; children 10 years or younger must be accompanied by a parent or guardian (ORS 163.545). Any restriction of a child's or young adult's access to the Internet is the responsibility of the parent or guardian. Selected terminals utilize Internet filters that block some Internet sites. i 7. Tigard Public Library provides access to a printer from the public computer workstations. Copies are 10 cents per sheet. Please keep in mind that information printed from a public computer workstation is not private and can be viewed by other patrons and staff. 8. Unacceptable behavior that may result in the loss of public computer privileges include: • Internet access for purposes which violate U.S., state or local laws; r • Making unauthorized copies of copyrighted or licensed software or data; Adopted by the Tigard Library Board November 13, 2003 • Tampering with the settings of any computer; • Using another person's library card number to log onto a public computer for the purpose of avoiding the one hour limit on computer use. Any person who refuses to comply with these directions will be asked to leave the Library premises. Law enforcement officials may be called to enforce compliance with such a request. Adopted by the Tigard Library Board November 13, 2003 i i i i r r AGENDA ITEM # q FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Continuation of Public Hearing for the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan (Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 2003-00003/Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 2003-00004/Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 2003-00005/Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 2003-00006) PREPARED BY: Jim Hendryx DEPT HEAD OK ✓ bl~-/IOCITYMGROK !/U#7`-'' ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Continuation of the December 2, 2003 public hearing for the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan. Council can accept the Annexation Plan and place it on a March 9, 2004 or subsequent ballot; take no action at this time, form sub- committees to address specific issues and defer action until Summer 2004, with a possible election date in November, 2004; or deny the Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Council consider one of the above alternatives for The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan (Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 2003-00003/Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 2003-00004/Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 2003-00005/Zone Change Annexation (ZCA) 2003-00006). INFORMATION SUMMARY The Public Hearing for the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan was opened on December 2, 2003. The meeting was continued to December 16, 2003. Verbal testimony was closed at the end of the meeting on December 2"J. Written testimony will be accepted until noon, on Thursday, December I Ph. The Council Meeting Recap and Staff Assignments for the meeting of December 2, 2003, is attached (Attachment 3). Pages 3-7 illustrate the series of comments made by citizens during the public hearing as well as Council direction. The City of Tigard is proposing to annex 1,378 acres of Washington County known as Bull Mountain through the annexation plan process. State law ORS 195.205 allows the City to annex territory within an urban growth boundary (UGB) pursuant to a detailed annexation plan, subject to voter approval. If the Tigard City Council approves The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan, it could place the proposal on the March 91h 2004 ballot or subsequent ballot. The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan proposal states that the City of Tigard can serve the Bull Mountain area without a significant reduction in service to Tigard residents. Due to size, the proposal divides the area into four subareas: East (276.95 acres), South (492.18 acres), North (357.35 acres), and West (251.23). To allow time to hire additional staff, acquire equipment, and maintain current service standards to City residents, the Plan proposes a three-phase approach: Phase 1: East, 2004; Phase 2: South, 2005; Phase 3: North and West, 2006. Although there are other methods of annexation, the City chose the annexation plan method because it requires the creation of a long-term annexation strategy. The Tigard Urban Service Agreement names the City of Tigard as the ultimate service provider for the Plan Area, for most services. Without annexation, the City has limited ability to plan for, provide for, and manage growth outside its City limits to ensure that efficient and effective public facilities and services are available when needed. The TUSA contains a provision that the City shall endeavor to annex the Bull Mountain area in the near to mid-term (3 to 5 years). Lastly, if The Bull Mountain Annexation flan is approved by the Council, ORS 195.205 allows both the territory to be annexed and the annexing city to vote on the annexation plan proposal. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A - alternatives given above. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Growth and Growth Management Goal #2, Urban services are provided to all citizens within Tigard's urban growth boundary and recipients of services pay their share. ATTACHMENT LIST (Note: Attachments to the Agenda Item Summary prepared for this item for December 2, 2003, will be resubmitted to the City Council members in their electronic packets.) Please refer to the December 2, 2003, packet to view Attachments 1 and 2: Attachment 1: Resolution Exhibit A: The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan, September 2003 Appendix B: Fiscal Analysis Update Appendix C: Tax Rate Table Appendix D: Tigard Urban Service Agreement, November 26, 2002 Appendix E: Evaluation Criteria from 2003 Assessment Report Technical Document B: Facilities and Public Services Assessment Report for the Bull Mountain Area, 2003 and The Bull Mountain Annexation Study, 2001 (including Appendix D, 2001 Tax Rate Table, and L Appendix F, Question and Answer Packet) C Exhibit B: Staff Report Attachment 2: Bull Mountain Annexation Plan Comment Log, through 11/18/03 1 1 Attachment 3: Council Meeting Recap and Staff Assignments, Meeting of 12/02/03 i FISCAL NOTES The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan proposes to annex approximately 1,378 acres of land into the City of Tigard with an assessed value of $605,857,310 (North: $193,411,910; East: $52,016,420; South: $251,261,770; West: $109,167,210). The plan proposes a three-phased annexation, employing the following sequence: East, 2004; South, 2005; North and West, 2006. Item No. :;Iz- For Council Newsletter dated 12-57o 3 of TIC Council Meeting Recap & Staff Assignments Meeting of 12/02/03 Rate Meleese0i:'.De0e60, er:5y; .00 Number 0042 (Note: The following recap was prepared to record, in an abbreviated outline, the final decisions by the Council or Council's direction to staff. Formal, more-detailed minutes will be prepared for Council consideration at a later date. For more information, contact City Recorder Cathy Wheatley at 503-639-4171, Ext 2410 or cathy@ci.tigard.or.us) Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Council President Dirksen. • STUDY SESSION Councilor Moore will speak at the services for Mayor Griffith on behalf of the City of Tigard. Angela ]ensen, Student envoy from the Tigard High School will speak during the visitor's agenda. Dan Murphy of the Tigard Chamber of Commerce cannot attend. The Chamber holiday lunch was scheduled for December 9, but has been cancelled since it is the same day as the funeral services for Mayor Griffith. Council discussed process for the public hearing on Bull Mountain. Staff report will take about 20 minutes. After the staff report Councilor Dirksen will note that Council has discussed the possibility of postponing the annexation plan ballot measure until November 2004. In the interim a number of subcommittees will be formed to research and respond to issues raised from Bull Mountain residents who have attended Coffee Talks and the Open House meeting on November 19. The Council will not make a decision tonight.. Oral testimony will be received at this hearing; written testimony will be requested and the Council will set a deadline for submittal of the testimony. Council decided to hold the two Coffee Talks scheduled in December: December 10 will be attended by Councilor Wilson and the Talk of December 18 will be attended by Council President Dirksen. A CP04B meeting will be held on December 4 at Deer Creek Elementary at 7 p.m. Council President Dirksen and Councilor Wilson will attend. Councilor Sherwood advised that she will be serving for the next year on the Regional Affordable Housing Task Force. City Manager Monahan noted that there is a ribbon cutting ceremony scheduled for the Bonita crosswalk at 9 a.m. on December 4. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 1 Council President Dirksen and Community Development Director Hendryx will attend a meeting regarding urban renewal at 2 p.m. in Beaverton on December 4. There was brief discussion about the Council's options for filling a vacancy on the Council. Information was distributed to the Council members. City Attorney Ramis noted that there are a range of choices for the Council to consider. This matter will be discussed further on December 16. Council members commented that they would like to wait until after the first of the year decide upon what should be done about the vacancy of the Mayor's position. A goal-setting session is scheduled for January 12, which may be one reason why Council members thought they might want to make a decision by that time if possible. City Manager Monahan advised that the Griffith family has requested that donations in memory of Mayor Griffith be made to the Tigard Skatepark. City Manager suggested that the Council review in late January some guidelines to give to the Skatepark Task Force regarding when the property would be available for the park and to obtain from the Skatepark a commitment about when they anticipate they would have completed their fundraising. Council meeting recessed at 7:03 Council business meeting convened at 7:27 p.m. Council President Dirksen called the meeting to order. He noted the passing of Mayor Jim Griffith on November 28, 2003. He asked for a moment of silence in memory of Mayor Griffith. Council President Dirksen said he thought the Mayor would want the business of the City to move forward. 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA Tigard High School Student Envoy Angela Jensen gave a report on the activities at Tigard High School. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: The following consent agenda items were approved by Council: 3.1 Approve Council Minutes for October 20, 21 and 28, November 4, 2003 j 3.2 Authorize the Issuance of a Limited Tax Improvement Bond for the Remaining Unpaid Assessments for the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District - Resolution No. 03-63 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award Three-Year Contract with JBI8TK for Insurance Agent of Record Services Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 2 b. Award Contract to LRS Architects, Inc., for City Hall and Existing Library Facilities Remodel and Construction Oversight 3.4 Approve Budget Amendment No. 11 Transferring One Position from Network Services to Police and Adjusting Appropriations - Res. No. 03-64 3.5 Approve Continued Participation in the International Resource Cities Program - Resolution No. 03-65 4. PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) - BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN (ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA1 2003-00003/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA1 2003-00004/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION jZCAJ 2003-00005/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION jZCAJ 2003-00006) ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2003-00003,2003-00004, 2003- 00005, 2003-00005 BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN REQUEST: The City of Tigard is proposing to annex 1,378 acres of Washington County known as Bull Mountain through the annexation plan process. State law allows the City to annex territory within an urban growth boundary (UGB) pursuant to a detailed annexation plan, subject to voter approval. If the Tigard City Council approves the annexation proposal, it would set a date for the proposal to be placed on the ballot. LOCATION: The unincorporated area is within the UGB. It is generally bounded on the north by Barrows Road, on the east by Tigard City limits, on the south by Beef Bend Road, and on the west partially by 150th Avenue and near Roy Rogers Road. For specific boundary, see vicinity map. ZONE: The area includes R- 4.5 (Low-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 7,500 square feet), R-7 (Medium-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 5,000 square feet), R-12 (Medium-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 3,050 square feet) and R- 25 (Medium High-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 1,480 square feet). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are set out in Community Development Code Chapter 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; ORS Chapters 195.205 and 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. Both hearings (annexation plan and ballot measure) were opened so that testimony could be taken on both items. Council President Dirksen advised the audience of guidelines for the public hearings noting that the intention was to hear the staff report and conduct the public hearing. The Council would not make a decision about the annexation plan tonight; the hearings would be continued to December 16, 2003. A staff report was given by Community Development Director Jim Hendryx, highlighted by a PowerPoint presentation, the presentation is on file with the City Recorder. Staff recommended approval of the Annexation Plan. Council President Dirksen advised the audience that in light of citizen input received to date, the Council had discussed an option of postponing the ballot measure from Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 3 March 2004 to November 2004. The interim months would be used to form subcommittees to review and respond to issues raised including questions about parks, police, street maintenance, engineering, etc. The subcommittees would include staff members from Tigard and Washington County and citizen representation from CP04B. County Chair Tom Brian and County Commissioner Roy Rogers indicated they would lend their full cooperation and support to this review process and would be happy to provide staff services. If it is determined to place this Issue on the ballot in November 2004, the current proposal would be that the area would not come in to the City in phases, but would be annexed all at once. One drawback is that the County was committed to collecting parks systems development charges once the City of Tigard had approved a ballot measure for an annexation plan. There is a question about whether the County would delay collecting these charges to coincide with the delay in the process referred to above. After a brief review of the guidelines for testimony, more than 30 people presented testimony to the Council. One person spoke in favor noting his belief that Bull Mountain residents should join the City of Tigard so that they would be paying for facilities and services provided by the City. He said it was imperative to incorporate the Bull Mountain area for a more sustainable overall sense of community. The remaining persons who had signed in indicated they were opponents to the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan. Reasons for their opposition included the following: • Concern about the way the development has occurred to date in the area citing poor planning. • No tangible benefits from annexation have been identified for the Bull Mountain residents. • Codes should be changed for better planning purposes. Support of a city moratorium on building permits until the annexation plan is in action. • Concerns about whether the ORS 195 process for annexation is the best L process to be using for this situation. s Request that the annexation plan provide for controls in protection of views from properties. 0 Concerns about the one-year delay before the City would assume responsibility for roads and streets and questioned whether the City would be a u responsible for maintenance. j • Charge that the City is looking to annex Bull Mountain because it is a "plum" and the reason for annexing is to collect additional taxes from this area without a corresponding benefit to the Bull Mountain residents. • Services received from Washington County meet the needs of the residents. • Request that benefits of annexation for residents be specifically identified. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 4 • Concerns about the burden of higher taxes. • Notation that the Bull Mountain residents use the area's transportation system, but so does "half of Portland." • Referred to problems of Pacific Highway and lack of good planning. • Concerns about building density that is occurring. • Suggested a fee be charged to non-Tigard residents for the Library and parks. • Noted volunteer services given by Bull Mountain residents to Tigard causes. • Concerns that this process has created an adversarial situation. • Concerns that the beauty of the area be protected. • Want of a government that cares for citizens and listens to citizens' concerns. • Desire to maintain the rural character on Bull Mountain. • Concern that comprehensive planning needs to be done with citizen participation. • Charge that Tigard needs to take care of planning issues and update its code and comprehensive plan before looking to annex Bull Mountain area. • Support for the delay to November to address questions and to use time for voter education. • Concern there has been no emphasis toward education City of Tigard voters. • Noted opposition because it feels like a hostile take over. • What benefits City of Tigard citizens should this annexation take place? • Requested answers to questions such as: Will residents be required to hook up to sewers, pave gravel roads, construct sidewalks? • Sheriff's department has been responsive, concerns that with annexation, there would be less police protection. • Community character and quality of life issues have not been addressed. • Annexation Plan has been described as "adequate," and "adequate" is not acceptable - should work towards "excellence." • More citizen input is needed. • Noted appreciation of Council's "genuine efforts" to look again at this issue. • Noted that "likes the way it is now," and doesn't want anymore development. • Noted concerns with safety on Beef Bend Road and Bull Mountain Road and what plans would there be for capital improvements and when would these take place? • Noted that in the City of Tigard there are many areas that do not have contiguous sidewalks; Tigard needs to look at its own infrastructure. • People are frustrated by the lack of control and want to have questions answered. • Does not want the Bull Mountain area to look like the rest of Tigard. • Does not want higher taxes. • Will there be any guarantees about the amount of tax dollars contributed by Bull Mountain would be spent on Bull Mountain? Suggested that in the first Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 5 five years, all tax dollars generated by Bull Mountain be spent on Bull Mountain. • Willing to wait for annexation until 2004 so that more planning could be done for park Improvements on Bull Mountain. • Development Is occurring at an alarming rate. • Tigard is a great city known for accomplishments and listening to citizens. Past leaders have listened. 99% of Bull Mountain residents are against annexation. • Washington County has done an excellent job providing services; additional layers of government are not necessary. • Satisfied with services in Washington County; does not want to pay more taxes for something that Is not needed. • Suggested that annexation of Bull Mountain would Increase Tigard's tax revenue it collects by 50%. • Wants more speciflcity; what has been presented is too vague. • Wants a ban on townhouses and row houses. • Several people indicated interest in serving on subcommittees. • Annexation Plan lacks substance. • Urban services standards identifying levels of services that will be provided have not been identified. • Fearful that all Bull Mountain residents will receive Is higher taxes without corresponding benefits. • Discussion of legal Issues regarding the method of annexation chosen by the City of Tigard. • Request that people of Bull Mountain and City of Tigard be allowed to vote separately and for a double majority decision to be made before annexation could occur. • Questioned when a citizen of Bull Mountain could run for a city council position. • Has TriMet service to the area been addressed? • Where would the park land be located? • Concern that there has been a lack of coordination between the City and County. Disappointed with the County with regard to the collection of parks system development charges. • Concern about availability and cost of land remaining for parks. • Looks like a tax grab; what planning has been done to provide for livability? Doesn't agree with "completing our community" statement and questioned what was Incomplete for Tigard and Bull Mountain? • Lack of consistency because Council Identified a phased-in approach and now may consider annexing the area all at once. • Appears that the only value will be for additional taxes for Tigard. • Need a plan showing how Tigard and Bull Mountain residents will benefit. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 6 • Acknowledged Council members for their willingness to proceed with this meeting after their "profound loss" with the passing of Mayor Griffith. • Questioned why there were no citizens from the City of Tigard present to give their views? Has this annexation plan been explained adequately to the Tigard residents? At the conclusion of the public testimony, the Council decided to proceed as follows (see below). The public hearings on the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan and the Proposed Ballot Title were continued to December 16, 2003. Listed below is the process to assist people interested in providing written testimony or for viewing cable television broadcast: Bull Mountain Public Hearing Public testimony was provided to the City Council at its Dec. 2, 2003, public hearing on the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan. Council decided on the following procedures after hearing testimony: • The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan public hearing was continued to Dec. 16, 2003, 7:30 PM, Tigard City Hall, Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard, OR. • The Council concluded oral public testimony. • The Council will accept written public testimony that is delivered to City Recorder Cathy Wheatley by noon on Thurs, Dec. 11, 2003. (Mailing address is 13125 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard, OR 97223; or e-mail craig_d@ci.ticiard.or.us. • Council will consider the Bull Mountain agenda item during the Dec. 16 Council meeting. The Dec. 2, 2003, Council meeting will be replayed on cable channel 28 on Fri., Dec. 5, at 1 a.m. and 7 p.m.; Sat., Dec. 6, at 12 p.m.; and Tues., Dec. 9, at 7:30 p.m. The Dec. 16, 2003, meeting will be taped and replayed on cable channel 28 on Friday, Dec. 19, at 1 a.m. and 7 p.m.; Sat., Dec. 20, at 12 p.m.; and Tues., Dec. 23, at 7:30 p.m. For more information, please contact Cathy Wheatley at 503-639-4171, x2410. Adjournment: 10:18 p.m. i i ~ t~~n,~.wwuoama~xoz.aa i I Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 7 Agenda Item No.: 4 Meeting of: December 16, 2003 For additional packet materials on the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan please refer to the packet materials from the December 2, 2003 meeting, agenda item # 4. r "a D Attachment 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 03- A RESOLUTION AND FINAL ORDER APPROVINCY THE BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2003-00003/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2003-00004/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2003- 00005/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2003-00006, ADOPTING FINDINGS. WHEREAS, City staff has drafted a Bull Mountain Annexation Plan authorizing a possible approach to annexation of the Bull Mountain area to the City of Tigard; and WHEREAS, the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan would add 1,378 acres, including approximately 7,600 residents living in 2,600 homes, from an area of unincorporated Washington County known as Bull Mountain to the Tigard City limits; and WHEREAS, Bull Mountain is located within the Metro Urban Growth Boundary; and WHEREAS, urban services to the Bull Mountain area will be provided according to the Tigard Urban Services Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Annexation Plan states that the City of Tigard can serve the Bull Mountain area without a significant reduction in City service to Tigard residents; and WHEREAS, while there are other methods for annexation, the annexation plan method was chosen because it requires the creation of a long-term annexation strategy; and WHEREAS, because of the large land area involved, the Annexation Plan divides the area into four subareas (East, South, North and West) based on development patterns, topography and major roads; and WHEREAS, the Annexation Plan calls for a three-phase annexation, in 2004 (East Subarea), 2005 (South Subarea) and 2006 (North and West Subareas); and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan on 9 December 2, 2003, and r WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the testimony, submittals, and staff report on this matter; and Resolution No. 03- Page 1 WHEREAS, the City Council concludes that the proposed Annexation Plan would be in compliance with all applicable review criteria in the Oregon Revised Statutes, Metro Code and the Tigard Community Development Code, as described in the Staff Report; and WHEREAS, the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan would be subject to general voter approval at a later time, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council approves applications ZCA2003-00003/ZCA2003- 00004/ZCA2003-00005/ZCA2003-00006 - Bull Mountain Annexation Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2: The Tigard City Council adopts the findings stated in the Staff Report to the City Council, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference. The Council further adopts the findings stated in the above-referenced Exhibit A. SECTION 3: This resolution is effective when notice of the decision is mailed. PASSED: This day of , 2003. Council President - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard Resolution No. 03- Page 2 ;.Bill Monahan - Wilson-Comments From 11-25 meeting.doc Item No. j le• For Council Newsletter dated a~ I a'03 Transcription of Comments Related to Bull Mountain Annexation made by Councilor Nick Wilson at the November 25, 2003 Tigard City Council Meeting Requested by Mayor Pro Tern Craig Dirksen Councilor Wilson: My perspective on this is you know we go to the coffee talks and the meetings and what we hear from residents on Bull Mountain is "what am I going to get for my thirty or fifty bucks a month?" or whatever it's going to be and all of the focus is on the delivery of services in that geographic area. I can throw a baseball from my yard across the city limits. I live up there; they're my neighbors and they write Tigard on their return address, they drink the same water we do, they're virtually the same except that they don't contribute. We're going to generate an operating surplus from this, that's clear. I think to assume that all of those dollars should go to say hire police out there when nobody calls for police out there is ridiculous. They are in the same traffic congestion that we're in, they're tired of the same slouch downtown that we are and we've been operating for years on this sort of status quo, just do the bare minimum and maybe this an opportunity to say the people up there, our neighbors, can you help us do something that we've never done before? Can we get out of this and actually start to develop the downtown. Don't they have an interest in downtown too? Don't they have an interest in seeing Pacific Highway finally improved? If we can approach them that way saying you guys can help us substantially financially to do some of these things and let's work together. I:WDM\CATHYICCM\2003%WILSON COMMENTS FROM 11.25 MEETING.DOC • L ' i 1 I I . , Nevvsl~-tterr CITY OF TIGARD Community Development Shaping A Better Community MEMORANDUM CITY OF TIGARD TO: City Council FROM: Jim Hendryx INIa DATE: December 12, 2003 SUBJECT: Written Testimony - Bull Mountain Annexation At the December 2nd public hearing, Council received considerable public comment. At the close of the public testimony portion of the hearing, Council left open the ability for people to submit written testimony. Attached, you will find responses to all the public testimony, I have grouped the questions and comments into like-categories and, with the help of other departments, provided responses. You will note that some of the questions and comments are repetitious, but we have tried to be thorough. We attempted to put names with questions, but there are some instances where we could not match a person with a question. Numerous people spoke to several issues and the list of people may not reflect this. The Council minutes from December 2nd are not completed yet. Responses are attached (Attachment 1). The Council Recap from December 2nd and all correspondence are attached (Attachment 2). Two memos from the City Attorney's office are also attached (Attachments 3 and 4). Two letters were submitted after the December 11th noon deadline. Council will need to determine whether they will consider these letters. They are in an envelope (Attachment 5). i i i i i Attachment 1 Public Improvements • Concerns about the one-year delay before the City would assume responsibility for roads and streets and questioned whether the City would be responsible for maintenance. One year is the maximum amount of time it would take to transfer jurisdiction over all of the affected roads. The actual time may be shorter than this. Once the transfer is accomplished, the City is committed to providing street maintenance to current City standards. Council's consideration of delaying action on the Annexation Plan would provide additional time to work with the County, as well as citizens, on road maintenance issues. The county must bring all streets within the affected area up to minimal standards. Once transferred, Tigard will maintain all roads to City standards. • Referred to problems of Pacific Highway and lack of good planning. Pacific Highway is under state jurisdiction. Tigard's Transportation System Plan (TSP) focuses on developing alternative routes to Pacific Highway. The City continues to work with ODOT to prioritize improvements along 99W. The TSP identifies ultimate improvement standards for 99W, as well as all other streets within Tigard. As development occurs along 99W, improvements are made. The City's capital improvement process addresses improvements Citywide. • Requested answers to questions such as: Will residents be required to hook up to sewers, pave gravel roads, construct sidewalks? Tom Ferguson Once City sewer is available in proximity to a property, the property owner has the option to connect after paying the appropriate fees. There is no obligation to connect to the sewer if the property owner continues to use an existing septic system unless the system fails. Property owners may be required to connect to the City sewer if the owner does work that requires a building or land use permit. The same generally is true regarding gravel roads and sidewalk improvements. Residents may voluntarily elect to form a local improvement district to upgrade the road bordering their properties. Non- remonstrance agreements that were signed in the past are counted as in favor of an LID, should one be formed. However, the City has not used that method to improve streets. • Noted concerns with safety on Beef Bend Road and Bull Mountain Road and what plans would there be for capital improvements and when would these take place? Julie Russell The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan does not specify the timing of capital improvements needed to address either Bull Mountain Road or Beef Bend Road. Normally, capital improvements are identified through the City's capital improvement program yearly. Delaying action on the Annexation Plan would allow further consideration on what and if improvements can be made to either road. While Beef Bend Road will remain under County control, Tigard can advocate for its improvement. 1 r • Noted that in the City of Tigard there are many areas that do not have contiguous sidewalks; Tigard needs to look at its own infrastructure. Tom Ferguson, Don Brenneman The CIP program is assessed yearly. Capital improvements, such as street and sidewalk improvements, are assessed each year through a public process. Improvements are prioritized, subject to available funding. • The City may invoke "remonstrances" against property deeds to pay for roads. Non-remonstrance agreements on record for specific properties do obligate the owner of the property to participate in a local improvement district (LID) should one be formed. The LID formation process requires public hearings and the City's process requires over 50% of the properties in the area to be in favor of formation. Opposition of two-thirds of the properties in the area stops a LID. • Where would the park land be located? Tom Ferguson, Steven Burke, Tom Auguent The Tigard Park System Master Plan covers the City and the unincorporated Bull Mountain areas. To evaluate areas of greatest need, the park system master plan divided the study area into quadrants. The park master plan recommends facility improvements to address all underserved neighborhoods. The term "general location" refers to a quadrant or service area boundary. In most cases, the plan assumes that the needed park facilities could be located on any vacant land that meets park site selection criteria. In general, the master plan did not did focus on potentially suitable sites within underserved areas. Additional effort is necessary to refine the Plan and acquire property. Extensive public involvement would be required. • Concern that there has been a lack of coordination between the City and County. Disappointed with the County with regard to the collection of parks system development charges. Kesh McVey The City has for several years requested the authority to impose a park SDC on new development. Washington County has just adopted ordinance provisions that would allow the collection of Park SDCs for unincorporated Bull Mountain. This is subject to the City of Tigard proceeding with action on the annexation vote. The County has committed to collect Park SDCs. Assuming a positive vote on the annexation, funds would be collected between the time that Council acts on the plan and the vote. Those funds would be given to Tigard for parkland purchase and development. • Concern about availability and cost of land remaining for parks. Ken Henshel The cost of land continues to increase yearly and vacant land is disappearing. Ultimately, that will affect the ability to purchase land for parks. The City continues to update its Park SDC fees to keep up with inflation. 2 71 Taxes • Suggested that annexation of Bull Mountain would increase Tigard's tax revenue it collects by 50%. FY 2003-04 property tax revenues for the existing City are estimated in the budget to be $8,940,977. Applying the City tax rate of $2.5131 to FY 2003-04 Bull Mountain assessed value, would produce revenues of $1,522,462 if the area were in the City today. The total of those two numbers is $10,463,439. The Bull Mountain share of that total number is 15%. • The City is looking to annex Bull Mountain because it is a "plum" and the reason for annexing is to collect additional taxes from this area without a corresponding benefit to the Bull Mountain residents. Guy Harris The long-term provider designated to serve the unincorporated Bull Mountain area is the City of Tigard. Over the years, the City and County acting together have taken a number of steps toward adding the Bull Mountain area to the existing Tigard municipality. Several intergovernmental agreements (IGA) have been signed between Washington County and the City of Tigard. The most recent, signed in 2002, establishes the foundation for the Annexation Plan. The benefits are included in the Annexation Plan. • Does not want higher taxes. Virginia Dean, Don Brenneman The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan and associated studies point out that, ultimately, the City of Tigard is the logical provider of urban services to the Bull Mountain area. Increased taxes pay for municipal services, such as increased police, road maintenance, traffic calming, park funding, etc. • Will there be any guarantees about the amount of tax dollars contributed by Bull Mountain would be spent on Bull Mountain? Suggested that in the first Council Meeting (Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 5), that for five years, all tax dollars generated by Bull Mountain would be spent on Bull Mountain. Paul Giroux L The City does not segregate revenues by geographic area. Revenues are used to z provide needed services to all citizens. The needs of the Bull Mountain area will be prioritized with the needs of the existing City, and resources will be directed to the projects with the highest priority. Priorities are set by the City Budget Committee and 3 the City Council following citizen input using factors such as the severity of the problem, o number of people served, cost, and other criteria. 9 u • Concerns about the burden of higher taxes. Paul Giroux, Several speakers By annexing to the City of Tigard, Bull Mountain residents will no longer pay property taxes or assessments to the Washington County Enhanced Sheriffs Patrol District, Urban Road Maintenance, and street lighting districts. They will start paying taxes to 3 f 4 , the City of Tigard for services the City provides, such as higher levels of police protection and road maintenance. The estimated difference in the tax rate is $1.2675 per $1,000 of assessed valuation. For a property with an assessed value of $250,000, this results in a 7% to 8% increase in property taxes (depending in which school district the property is located). • If Tigard were to upgrade our street, would you charge us more taxes? No. According to the Washington County Tax Assessment office, typically, an improvement to a property that adds value, including a local road improvement, is treated as an Exception Value under Ballot Measure 50 and could result in proportionally higher taxes. An exception to this general rule is that if no individual permit is issued for an affected property, the improvement value will not be added to the property value. Planning • Charge that Tigard needs to take care of planning issues and update its code and comprehensive plan before looking to annex Bull Mountain area. Alice Ellis Gaut, Julie Russell The existing municipality and the adjacent urban unincorporated area are part of the same continuous area. Logically, they should be planned for together. The City's Comprehensive Plan was done in 1983. It is recognized that it needs to be updated. Likewise, the Bull Mountain Community Plan needs to be updated. Annexation of Bull Mountain provides a good opportunity to address both area's planning needs. • Concern about the way the development has occurred to date in the area citing poor planning. 6 The Bull Mountain Community Plan was developed by Washington County with the involvement of CPO-413. Since 1997, the City has been implementing the Bull Mountain Plan through a contract with the County. • Codes should be changed for better planning purposes. The codes follow policies developed through a public comprehensive planning process. Since adoption of the Development Code in 1984, various sections have been revised ~ to reflect changes in the community's priorities. s Does not want the Bull Mountain area to look like the rest of Tigard. i • Development is occurring at an alarming rate. Noel Beer Steven The Bull Mountain plan provides for development at urban densities. Development activity on Bull Mountain is essentially market driven, as is all building activity. • Concerns about building density that is occurring. Stu Byron, Several speakers 4 Property can be developed within a range from the minimum to the maximum density. For instance, a majority of land in unincorporated Bull Mountain is zoned R-7 (Residential/ 7 units per acre). As noted above, the City through an intergovernmental agreement administers the County's standards. The development restrictions in place can be changed only with a change of the comprehensive plan policies. The planned density for Bull Mountain was established in the County's Bull Mountain Community Plan. • Concerns that the beauty of the area be protected. Lisa Hamilton-Treick Bull Mountain is planned for urban development. What we can do is protect steep slopes, wetlands, floodplains, and environmentally sensitive areas. • Desire to maintain the rural character on Bull Mountain. The Bull Mountain area is located within the Metro Urban Growth Boundary. It is in the process of transitioning from a rural to an urban area. The Bull Mountain Community Plan sets urban densities for Bull Mountain. The County and City can't prevent urban development that complies with the Bull Mountain Community Plan. Under the plan, the area has been developing as an urban area. • Concern that comprehensive planning needs to be done with citizen participation. All of the City's planning processes include extensive citizen involvement. Citizen participation would be the key component of an update of the Comprehensive Plan. • Community character and quality of life issues have not been addressed. Ellen Beilstein, Lisa Hamilton-Treick The City does not have planning authority for the area proposed for annexation. The area is developing under the policies and standards of Washington County. Should the new area be annexed, the City would proceed with the development of a detailed plan that would address, among other issues, community character and quality of life. • Noted that "likes the way it is now," and doesn't want anymore development. Stu Byron The area is planned for development and will continue to do so whether or not annexation occurs in conformance with the County's Bull Mountain Community Plan. • Looks like a tax grab; what planning has been done to provide for livability? Julie Russell As indicated, the City does not have planning authority for the area proposed for annexation. The area is developing under the policies and standards of Washington County. Should the new area be annexed, the City would proceed with the development of a detailed plan that would address, among other issues, community livability. 5 71 Moratorium on Development • Support of a City moratorium on building permits until the annexation plan is in action. Tom Jacobs, Stu Byron Moratoriums are regulated by law (ORS 197.520, Manner of Declaring a Moratorium). There are specific processes that must be followed and specific timelines for the moratorium to be granted. While Tigard has the authority, through an IGA to review development proposals in the Bull Mountain area, it is still a County regulated area and only the County can activate a moratorium. • Wants a ban on townhouses and row houses. Steve Burke Townhouses and row houses are allowed uses in some zones. The City, by law, is required to follow the zoning standards that apply to various districts. Benefits to Bull Mt Residents • Request that benefits of annexation for residents be specifically identified. Tom Ferguson, Richard Ellis Gaut, Ken Henshel In many cases, if annexed into the City, Bull Mountain residents would receive the same services as they do now, but at a higher level. For instance, Police promptness in responding to calls would improve, with a higher ratio of police to population. Local streets would receive better and more frequent maintenance with patching, sealing, etc. Unlike the City, the County does not provide parks. The City also provides park facilities and would go through a public process to provide facilities for the Bull Mountain Area. Additionally, the City has a traffic calming program to meet neighborhood concerns. Below is a list of the mutual benefits of Bull Mountain annexation. They apply to City and unincorporated residents alike. The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan identifies the following long-term benefits of annexation: Completing the community. Annexation would allow the City (including the Bull Mountain residents) to plan for growth on Bull Mountain with an updated comprehensive plan for the entire community. i Smooth transition. The Annexation Plan method allows phases to be identified which enables services to be phased in effectively over time by the service providers. Efficiency. Annexation phases are identified based on the ability to provide services in an orderly manner instead of piece meal and unplanned over time. 6 Urban services by an urban provider. Annexation would provide urban levels of services to an area that has grown beyond its rural roots, and become an urbanized area with streets, sidewalks, and services that require City-level maintenance. Known costs and benefits. The Annexation Plan clarifies the costs and benefits of annexation to Bull Mountain residents, citizens of Tigard, the City and the County, and to all related agencies. Equity. Annexation would allow all users to equitably share service costs. Parks services. Annexation would allow parks services and resident privileges to be provided to the Bull Mountain area. Unify the community. Annexation would make Bull Mountain residents citizens of Tigard and would give them a say on local issues that affect their community's future. • No tangible benefits from annexation have been identified for the Bull Mountain residents. Stu Byron In many cases, if annexed into the City, Bull Mountain residents would receive the same services as they do now, but at a higher level. For instance, police promptness in responding to calls would improve to less than 4 minutes for priority calls. Local streets would receive more frequent maintenance, such as patching and sealing. In the case of parks, developers for the first time would begin paying into a fund reserved for park improvements. Additionally, annexation would make Bull Mountain residents full citizens of Tigard and would give them a say in local issues that affect their community's future. • What benefits the City of Tigard citizens should this annexation take place? Several Speakers Existing residents would see a slight reduction in their current property taxes to pay off the library bond. Additional tax revenue will result from annexation, over and above the cost of providing services, that can be used to address existing community-wide needs. The City's capital improvement program involves extensive public participation. Through this process, the community can identify how and where these funds could be directed. i • Wants more specificity; what has been presented is too vague. Several. Speakers Council is considering delaying action on the Plan until summer, during which time more specifics, on issues such as roads, police, and park planning can be developed with the assistance of the community. • Urban services standards identifying levels of services that will be provided have not been identified. Several Speakers 7 0 71 In general, the level of service standards would be the same as those that currently apply within the existing City area. These are spelled out in the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan, e.g., police promptness in responding to calls would improve to less than 4 minutes for priority calls. Local streets would receive more frequent maintenance, such as patching and sealing. In the case of parks, developers for the first time would begin paying into a fund reserved for park improvements. Additionally, annexation would make Bull Mountain residents full citizens of Tigard and would give them a say in local issues that affect their community's future. • Fearful that all Bull Mountain residents will receive is higher taxes without corresponding benefits. In most cases, Bull Mountain residents would receive the same services as they do now, but at a higher level. For instance, police promptness in responding to calls would improve to 4 minutes or less for priority calls. Local streets would receive better and more frequent maintenance for patching and sealing. In the case of parks, developers for the first time would begin paying into a fund reserved for park improvements. Additionally, annexation would make Bull Mountain residents full citizens of Tigard and would give them a say in local issues that affect their community's future. • Need a plan showing how Tigard and Bull Mountain residents will benefit. Delaying action on the Annexation Plan until summer 2004, would allow the community to develop specific answers to the issue of what residents of Bull Mountain will receive with annexation. Extensive details identifying service delivery exist in the Annexation Plan and associated reports. By delaying action, the Council along with the community can evaluate the specific programs targeting levels of service provision issues for roads, police service, parks, and planning for Bull Mountain. • Services received from Washington County meet the needs of the residents. Vinnie Wakala Washington County, along with Tigard, have identified the City as the logical provider of urban services. The Plan carries out this direction. As identified in the County 2000 Plan, Washington County wants to get out of providing urban level of services, such as Enhanced Sheriffs patrol, street maintenance and street lighting. • The Tualatin Valley Fire Department provides first rate service. Annexation would not result in a change in fire service providers. The Tualatin Valley Fire Department would continue to serve the Bull Mountain area. • Washington County has done an excellent job providing services; additional layers of government are not necessary. • Satisfied with services in Washington County; does not want to pay more ' taxes for something that is not needed. Teddy Dulling The County recognizes that cities are the logical providers of urban services. Several intergovernmental agreements recognize this point. The Annexation Plan addresses 8 the transition of services from the County to the City, such as road maintenance and urban levels of police service. • Doesn't agree with "completing our community" statement and questioned what was incomplete for Tigard and Bull Mountain? Unincorporated Bull Mountain has been recognized as being part of Tigard, in both the County's and the City's Comprehensive Plans. Annexation completes this vision to formally include Bull Mountain residents in all aspects of City services and participation. Sheriff's department has been responsive, concerns that with annexation, there would be less police protection. Teddy Dulling, Todd Morbel Objective information indicates that police coverage and response time would be improved with annexation, for instance, police promptness in responding to calls would improve to 4 minutes or less for priority calls. Annexation Method and Legal Process • Concerns about whether the ORS 195 process for annexation is the best process to be using for this situation. Dick Franzke, Stu Byron, LaVelle Day Council determined that using the annexation plan method per ORS 195.205 and 195.220, is the best way to accomplish the annexation of the remaining unincorporated portion of Bull Mountain. This is because the annexation will have implications for the residents of the existing municipality and the area to be annexed. • Annexation Plan lacks substance. Kesh McVey State statute specifies what must be addressed in an Annexation Plan, which can be found on page 2 of the Annexation Plan. The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan meets that standard. • Request that the Annexation Plan provide for controls in protection of views from properties. LaVelle Day Updating the Comprehensive Plan and Development Code would allow consideration of such standards. Annexation Plans do not address land use regulations. • Discussion of legal issues regarding the method of annexation chosen by the City of Tigard. LaVelle Day The main legal question is whether the City has the authority to annex territory by the Annexation Plan method. The City Attorney determined that any City may annex under ORS 195.205. An argument has been made that Tigard does not comply with this section because it does not provide an urban service. This argument fails for two 9 reasons: (1) the language "that provides an urban service" applies only to districts, and (2) the City does provide urban services. The phrase "that provides an urban service" could be read to apply only to "district" or to both "city" and "district." We believe that the language "that provides an urban service" applies only to "district." The interpretation of the language that makes most sense is that it was intended to exclude rural service districts from using the annexation process, not to exclude cities from using the process. However, even if "that provides an urban service" modifies "city," the City does provide urban services. The list of statutes referred to in ORS 195.205(1) includes ORS 195.065, which specifies that "urban services" includes, among other things, sanitary sewers, water, parks, and streets. The City provides each of these services. The City provides at least one urban service and therefore is an entity that may annex under ORS 195.205, even if "that provides an urban service" applies to "city." Request that people of Bull Mountain and City of Tigard be allowed to vote separately and for a double majority decision to be made before annexation could occur. Stu Byron Council has determined that annexation via approval of an Annexation Plan, in accordance with state statutes, is the most appropriate way to accomplish the annexation because it involves both Tigard residents and Bull Mountain residents. The Annexation Plan involves approximately 1,400 acres and 7,600 residents which would have a significant impact on the City of Tigard. Given the overall long term impact on the City, Council determined that the Annexation Plan approach was the most appropriate way to engage both the City and the Bull Mountain residents in the decision-making process. State statutes require both Bull Mountain and City residents to vote on an Annexation Plan. • Concerns that this process has created an adversarial situation. Ron Ellis Gaut At the same time, it has put this 20-year-old issue on the table and has initiated a community-wide dialogue about streets, parks, development, and governance. Timeline • Support for the delay to November to address questions and to use time for voter education. Allice Ellis Gaut City Council is discussing this issue on December 16tH • Willing to wait for annexation until 2004 so that more planning could be done for park improvements on Bull Mountain. 10 Should City Council delay this issue until summer 2004, the additional time will allow further consideration of park planning. The park planning issues will be addressed by a task group consisting of City and County staff and City and Bull Mountain residents. The group will work on planning and funding mechanisms for parks in Bull Mountain. - Lack of consistency because Council identified a phased-in approach and now may consider annexing the area all at once. All alternatives presented by the City at the December 2"d hearing are consistent with ORS 195, Metro and City requirements. In general, they all meet the legal requirements that the City needs to comply with to approve the Annexation Plan. Council is considering other options in response to issues raised by citizens. Public Involvement • Concern there has been no emphasis toward education City of Tigard voters. Bob Rohlf, Ron Ellis Gaut The City used a number of communication tools to educate Tigard citizens on this issues: press releases, community meetings, cable TV broadcasts, City newsletter stories, and information on the City webpage. • More citizen input is needed. The Communication Plan developed for the Bull Mountain Annexation involves a range of communication tools, such as press releases, community meetings, cable TV broadcasts, newsletters, coffee talks, web site, and open houses. The City used extensively all available communication tools. In short, the Communication Plan developed for the Bull Mountain Annexation allowed for broad public input. • Questioned why there were no citizens from the City of Tigard present to give their views? Has this annexation plan been explained adequately to the Tigard residents? Bob Rohlf, Ron Ellis Gaut The Communication Plan developed for the Bull Mountain Annexation involves a range of communication tools, such as press releases, community meetings, cable TV L broadcasts, newsletters, coffee talks, web site, and open houses. The City used r extensively all available communication tools. In short, the Communication Plan developed for the Bull Mountain Annexation allowed for broad public input. • People are frustrated by the lack of control and want to have questions answered. J The Communication Plan developed by the City provided a mechanism to respond to i public inquiries. Every effort has been made to respond to individual queries. The answers are based on an extensive analysis done by the City. This extensive analysis provides a good factual base and allows the City to provide objective, fact-based answers. 11 71 • Several people indicated interest in serving on subcommittees. Steven Burke Should City Council delay action until summer 2004, citizens will be invited to participate on subcommittees and in the process. • Do any residents of the unincorporated area "participate in any of the following organizations and committees: CIT facilitator, Community Connector, Planning Commission, Visioning survey respondents, Task Force Members, Action Committee members? One Planning Commission member lives in unincorporated Metzger. Currently, five Community Facilitators live within unincorporated Bull Mountain. The Tigard Building Appeals Board includes five members who live outside the City. One library board member and one ex-officio member live outside. One Tigard Youth Forum member lives outside. At least two Visioning Task Force members lived in the unincorporated Bull Mountain Area. The initial visioning survey was included in the Tigard Cityscape, which, at that time, was mailed to all residences located within the Urban Services Area. • Why was there no public involvement in and no residents notified when the Urban Services Agreement was being considered? Public involvement was coordinated by the County and included open houses and a formal public hearing. Bull Mountain Use of City Services • Notation that the Bull Mountain residents use the area's transportation system, but so does "half of Portland." The long established principal here is that each jurisdiction's local residents pay for their own local streets and, by mutual consent, allow reciprocal use by other area residents. Residents of Sherwood pay for Sherwood streets and the residents of Tigard pay for Tigard streets. Sherwood does not charge Tigard residents for local street use and vice versa. To a greater or lesser extent, we all use each others streets. Further, the main roads within the City, such as Hall Boulevard, Pacific Highway, and Scholls Ferry, are owned and paid for by the State or County and are the most heavily used by non- resident pass-through traffic. • Suggested a fee be charged to non-Tigard residents for the Library and parks. This is highly impractical and may require the hiring of additional staff to operate. By mutual consent and convenience, the jurisdictions within the County do not charge each other's residents for the use of their local libraries or parks. However, this could be considered. 12 Other • Noted volunteer services given by Bull Mountain residents to Tigard causes. These contributions are much appreciated and help build a sense of community. • Tigard is a great city known for accomplishments and listening to citizens. Past leaders have listened. 99% of Bull Mountain residents are against annexation. According to the scientific telephone survey conducted by Riley Research Associates among City of Tigard and Bull Mountain residents, the overall support for annexation is 74%. Support among Tigard residents is 80%, while support on Bull Mountain is 37%. • Want a government that cares for citizens and listens to citizens' concerns. The City Council and staff welcome and encourage citizen participation. The Council members themselves are private citizens and other citizens are members of a whole array of citizen committees and task forces. The open houses, coffee talks, web page, etc., are being utilized to get public input. Council is considering delaying the annexation vote in response to citizen concerns. • Annexation Plan has been described as "adequate," and "adequate" is not acceptable - should work towards "excellence." Lisa Hamilton-Treick The term adequate refers to legally adequate or meeting the state statutes governing annexation. The Annexation Plan is a tool to determine the how, when, where, and who of annexation. • Questioned when a citizen of Bull Mountain could run for a City Council position. Dick Franzke, Bruce Doble Any City of Tigard resident that meets the qualifications is eligible to run for pubic office. They must be a registered voter and have lived in Tigard or a newly-annexed area continuously for 12 months immediately proceeding the election. Has TriMet service to the area been addressed? The short answer is yes. At workshop meetings held in October and November of this year, Council discussed with TriMet representatives, including agency General Manager Fred Hansen, a proposed MOU that lays out a collaborative approach to enhancing transit access in Tigard. As pointed out by the agency representatives, Tigard is the first local area selected by TriMet as a target for focused service and capital investments as part of the agency's 2002-07 Transit Investment Plan. The MOU is a framework for City/TriMet collaboration. The transit agency and the City agree to work together through the MOU to solve local transit issues. Key strategies contained in the Tigard Transportation System Plan and Local Service Transit Action Plan, which identifies Bull Mountain as an underserved area, are incorporated into the MOU. The MOU commits TriMet to address, with City guidance, fixed route transit needs, capital improvement needs, and marketing and safety. The MOU also includes a commitment to provide regular progress reports to 13 Council. The timeline for implementing the service and capital improvements coincides with the 2006 opening of Commuter Rail. i/Irpn/dr/annexation.council I I 14 Attachment 2 t G` 1y of TigCV Council Meeting Recap & Staff Assignments Meeting of 12/02/03 1 e Number 0042 (!Vote: The following recap was prepared to record, in an abbreviated outline, the final decisions by the Council or CounciPs direction to staff. Formal, more-detailed minutes will be prepared for Council consideration at a later date. For more information, contact City Recorder Cathy Wheatley at 503-639-4171, Ext 2410 or cathy@ci.tigard.or.us) Meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Council President Dirksen. • STUDY SESSION Councilor Moore will speak at the services for Mayor Griffith on behalf of the City of Tigard. Angela )ensen, Student envoy from the Tigard High School will speak during the visitor's agenda. Dan Murphy of the Tigard Chamber of Commerce cannot attend. The Chamber holiday lunch was scheduled for December 9, but has been cancelled since it is the same day as the funeral services for Mayor Griffith. Council discussed process for the public hearing on Bull Mountain. Staff report will take about 20 minutes. After the staff report Councilor Dirksen will note that Council has discussed the possibility of postponing the annexation plan ballot measure until November 2004. In the interim a number of subcommittees will be formed to research and respond to issues raised from Bull Mountain residents who have attended Coffee Talks and the Open House meeting on November 19. The Council will not make a decision tonight. Oral testimony will be received at this hearing; written testimony will be requested and the Council will set a deadline for submittal of the testimony. Council decided to hold the two Coffee Talks scheduled in December: December 10 will be attended by Councilor Wilson and the Talk of December 18 will be attended by Council President Dirksen. A CP04B meeting will be held on December 4 at Deer Creek Elementary at 7 p.m. Council President Dirksen and Councilor Wilson will attend. Councilor Sherwood advised that she will be serving for the next year on the Regional Affordable Housing Task Force. City Manager Monahan noted that there is a ribbon cutting ceremony scheduled for the Bonita crosswalk at 9 a.m. on December 4. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 1 Council President Dirksen and Community Development Director Hendryx will attend a meeting regarding urban renewal at 2 p.m. in Beaverton on December 4. There was brief discussion about the Council's options for filling a vacancy on the Council. Information was distributed to the Council members. City Attorney Ramis noted that there are a range of choices for the Council to consider. This matter will be discussed further on December 16. Council members commented that they would like to wait until after the first of the year decide upon what should be done about the vacancy of the Mayor's position. A goal-setting session is scheduled for January 12, which may be one reason why Council members thought they might want to make a decision by that time if possible. City Manager Monahan advised that the Griffith family has requested that donations in memory of Mayor Griffith be made to the Tigard Skatepark. City Manager suggested that the Council review in late January some guidelines to give to the Skatepark Task Force regarding when the property would be available for the park and to obtain from the Skatepark a commitment about when they anticipate they would have completed their fundraising. Council meeting recessed at 7:03 Council business meeting convened at 7:27 p.m. Council President Dirksen called the meeting to order. He noted the passing of Mayor Jim Griffith on November 28, 2003. He asked for a moment of silence in memory of Mayor Griffith. Council President Dirksen said he thought the Mayor would want the business of the City to move forward. 2. VISITOR'S AGENDA • Tigard High School Student Envoy Angela Jensen gave a report on the activities at Tigard High School. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: The following consent agenda items were approved by Council: 3.1 Approve Council Minutes for October 20, 21 and 28, November 4, 2003 3.2 Authorize the Issuance of a Limited Tax Improvement Bond for the Remaining Unpaid Assessments for the Dartmouth Street Local Improvement District - Resolution No. 03-63 3.3 Local Contract Review Board: a. Award Three-Year Contract with ]Bl8xK for Insurance Agent of Record Services Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 2 10 b. Award Contract to LRS Architects, Inc., for City Hall and Existing Library Facilities Remodel and Construction Oversight 3.4 Approve Budget Amendment No. 11 Transferring One Position from Network Services to Police and Adjusting Appropriations - Res. No. 03-64 3.5 Approve Continued Participation in the International Resource Cities Program - Resolution No. 03-65 4. PUBLIC HEARING (LEGISLATIVE) - BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN (ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003-00003/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003-00004/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003-00005/ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION [ZCA] 2003-00006) ZONE CHANGE ANNEXATION (ZCA) 2003-00003, 2003-00004.12003- 00005, 2003-00005 BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN REQUEST: The City of Tigard is proposing to annex 1,378 acres of Washington County known as Bull Mountain through the annexation plan process. State law allows the City to annex territory within an urban growth boundary (UGB) pursuant to a detailed annexation plan, subject to voter approval. If the Tigard City Council approves the annexation proposal, it would set a date for the proposal to be placed on the ballot. LOCATION: The unincorporated area is within the UGB. It is generally bounded on the north by Barrows Road, on the east by Tigard City limits, on the south by Beef Bend Road, and on the west partially by 150th Avenue and near Roy Rogers Road. For specific boundary, see vicinity map. ZONE: The area includes R- 4.5 (Low-Density Residential District; minimum lot size'7,500 square feet), R-7 (Medium-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 5,000 square feet), R-12 (Medium-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 3,050 square feet) and R- 25 (Medium High-Density Residential District; minimum lot size 1,480 square feet). APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: The approval standards for annexations are set out in Community Development Code Chapter 18.320 and 18.390, Comprehensive Plan Policies 2 and 10; ORS Chapters 195.205 and 222; and Metro Code Chapter 3.09. Both hearings (annexation plan and ballot measure) were opened so that testimony could be taken on both items. Council President Dirksen advised the audience of guidelines for the public hearings noting that the intention was to hear the staff report and conduct the public hearing. The Council would not make a decision about the annexation plan tonight; the hearings would be continued to December 16, 2003. A staff report was given by Community Development Director ]im Hendryx, highlighted by a PowerPoint presentation, the presentation is on file with the City Recorder. Staff recommended approval of the Annexation Plan. Council President Dirksen advised the audience that in light of citizen input received to date, the Council had discussed an option of postponing the ballot measure from Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 3 March 2004 to November 2004. The interim months would be used to form subcommittees to review and respond to issues raised including questions about parks, police, street maintenance, engineering, etc. The subcommittees would include staff members from Tigard and Washington County and citizen representation from CP04B. County Chair Tom Brian and County Commissioner Roy Rogers indicated they would lend their full cooperation and support to this review process and would be happy to provide staff services. If it is determined to place this issue on the ballot in November 2004, the current proposal would be that the area would not come in to the City in phases, but would be annexed all at once. One drawback is that the County was committed to collecting parks systems development charges once the City of Tigard had approved a ballot measure for an annexation plan. There is a question about whether the County would delay collecting these charges to coincide with the delay in the process referred to above. After a brief review of the guidelines for testimony, more than 30 people presented testimony to the Council. One person spoke in favor noting his belief that Bull Mountain residents should join the City of Tigard so that they would be paying for facilities and services provided by the City. He said it was imperative to incorporate the Bull Mountain area for a more sustainable overall sense of community. The remaining persons who had signed in indicated they were opponents to the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan. Reasons for their opposition included the following: • Concern about the way the development has occurred to date in the area citing poor planning. • No tangible benefits from annexation have been identified for the Bull Mountain residents. • Codes should be changed for better planning purposes. • Support of a city moratorium on building pen-nits until the annexation plan is in action. • Concerns about whether the ORS 195 process for annexation is the best process to be using for this situation. • Request that the annexation plan provide for controls in protection of views from properties. • Concerns about the one-year delay before the City would assume responsibility for roads and streets and questioned whether the City would be responsible for maintenance. • Charge that the City is looking to annex Bull Mountain because it is a "plum" and the reason for annexing is to collect additional taxes from this area without a corresponding benefit to the Bull Mountain residents. • Services received from Washington County meet the needs of the residents. • Request that benefits of annexation for residents be specifically identified. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 4 • Concerns about the burden of higher taxes. • Notation that the Bull Mountain residents use the area's transportation system, but so does "half of Portland." • Referred to problems of Pacific Highway and lack of good planning. • Concerns about building density that is occurring. • Suggested a fee be charged to non-Tigard residents for the Library and parks. • Noted volunteer services given by Bull Mountain residents to Tigard causes. • Concerns that this process has created an adversarial situation. • Concerns that the beauty of the area be protected. • Want of a government that cares for citizens and listens to citizens' concerns. • Desire to maintain the rural character on Bull Mountain. • Concern that comprehensive planning needs to be done with citizen participation. • Charge that Tigard needs to take care of planning issues and update its code and comprehensive plan before looking to annex Bull Mountain area. • Support for the delay to November to address questions and to use time for voter education. • Concern there has been no emphasis toward education City of Tigard voters. • Noted opposition because it feels like a hostile take over. • What benefits City of Tigard citizens should this annexation take place? • Requested answers to questions such as: Will residents be required to hook up to sewers, pave gravel roads, construct sidewalks? • Sheriffs department has been responsive, concerns that with annexation, there would be less police protection. • Community character and quality of life issues have not been addressed. • Annexation Plan has been described as "adequate," and "adequate" is not acceptable - should work towards "excellence." • More citizen input is needed. • Noted appreciation of Council's "genuine efforts" to look again at this issue. • Noted that "likes the way it is now," and doesn't want anymore development. • Noted concerns with safety on Beef Bend Road and Bull Mountain Road and what plans would there be for capital improvements and when would these take place? • Noted that in the City of Tigard there are many areas that do not have contiguous sidewalks; Tigard needs to look at its own infrastructure. • People are frustrated by the lack of control and want to have questions answered. • Does not want the Bull Mountain area to look like the rest of Tigard. • Does not want higher taxes. • Will there be any guarantees about the amount of tax dollars contributed by Bull Mountain would be spent on Bull Mountain? Suggested that in the first five years, all tax dollars generated by Bull Mountain be spent on Bull Mountain. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 5 • Willing to wait for annexation until 2004 so that more planning could be done for park improvements on Bull Mountain. • Development is occurring at an alarming rate. • Tigard Is a great city known for accomplishments and listening to citizens. Past leaders have listened. 99% of Bull Mountain residents are against annexation. • Washington County has done an excellent job providing services; additional layers of government are not necessary. • Satisfied with services in Washington County; does not want to pay more taxes for something that is not needed. • Suggested that annexation of Bull Mountain would increase Tigard's tax revenue it collects by 50%. • Wants more specificity; what has been presented is too vague. Wants a ban on townhouses and row houses. • Several people indicated interest in serving on subcommittees. • Annexation Plan lacks substance. • Urban services standards identifying levels of services that will be provided have not been identified. Fearful that all Bull Mountain residents will receive is higher taxes without corresponding benefits. • Discussion of legal issues regarding the method of annexation chosen by the City of Tigard. • Request that people of Bull Mountain and City of Tigard be allowed to vote separately and for a double majority decision to be made before annexation could occur. • Questioned when a citizen of Bull Mountain could run for a city council position. • Has TriMet service to the area been addressed? • Where would the park land be located? • Concern that there has been a lack of coordination between the City and County. Disappointed with the County with regard to the collection of parks system development charges. • Concern about availability and cost of land remaining for parks. C 0 Looks like a tax grab; what planning has been done to provide for livability? • Doesn't agree with "completing our community" statement and questioned what was incomplete for Tigard and Bull Mountain? i • Lack of consistency because Council identified a phased-in approach and now may consider annexing the area all at once. Appears that the only value will be for additional taxes for Tigard. • Need a plan showing how Tigard and Bull Mountain residents will benefit. Acknowledged Council members for their willingness to proceed with this meeting after their "profound loss" with the passing of Mayor Griffith. Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 -Page 6 c • Questioned why there were no citizens from the City of Tigard present to give their views? Has this annexation plan been explained adequately to the Tigard residents? At the conclusion of the public testimony, the Council decided to proceed as follows (see below). The public hearings on the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan and the Proposed Ballot Title were continued to December 16, 2003. Listed below is the process to assist people interested in providing written testimony or r for viewing cable television broadcast: earl L 1 4 ~r?~,''` Public testimony was provided to the City Council at its Dec. 2, 2003, public hearing on the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan. Council decided on the following procedures after hearing testimony: • The Bull Mountain Annexation Plan public hearing was continued to Dec. 16, 2003, 7:30 PM, Tigard City Hall, Town Hall, 13125 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard, OR. • The Council concluded oral public testimony. • The Council will accept written public testimony that is delivered to City Recorder Cathy Wheatley by noon on Thurs, Dec. 11, 2003. (Mailing address is 13125 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard, OR 97223; or e-mail craigd ci.t9ard.or.us. • Council will consider the Bull Mountain agenda item during the Dec. 16 Council meeting. The Dec. 2, 2003, Council meeting will be replayed on cable channel 28 on Fri., Dec. 5, at 1 a.m. and 7 p.m.; Sat., Dec. 6, at 12 p.m.; and Tues., Dec. 9, at 7:30 p.m. The Dec. 16, 2003, meeting will be taped and replayed on cable channel 28 on Friday, Dec. 19, at 1 a.m. and 7 p.m.; Sat., Dec. 20, at 12 p.m.; and Tues., Dec. 23, at 7:30 p.m. For more information, please contact Cathy Wheatley at 503-639-4171, x2410. Adjournment: 10:18 p.m. s Wft%C*Y C2P$000T031202.E0e Council Meeting Follow-Up Meeting of December 2, 2003 - Page 7 • FcF~~F O 12/10/03 gq~OFC l 1 C~ T Dear City Council: We are writing you regarding the annexation of Bull Mountain. We have been watching the council meetings and read the available information about this issue. After reviewing the material we can come to know other conclusion other than it would not be a good thing for us. We ask you to vote the annexation down. Please vote NO on this issue. Thank you Randy & kelly Sholes Randy sholes Kelly sholes 14595 SW 144" Tigard, Or 97224 5W 1-0A -7 Z -4-LL. V, I U -be G~,v~OGp~ 1 Q 2003 Ted Magnuson QtiC 14405 SW High Tor Drive Ad,ri Tigard, OR 97224-1425 t.magnuson@verizon.net phone & fax: 503 590 7998 Dec 9, 2003 City Recorder Cathy Wheatley City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 Public Comment on Bull Mountain Annexation. Dear Ms. Wheatley and members of the City Council; For some 10-12 years, the City of Tigard has been annexing territory as new development appears on Bull Mountain. While it is in some ways a joy to welcome new neighbors, this has not been without expense to those of us who have called Bull Mountain home over this time. Now admittedly, the city has levied some precursory development fees to reflect the additional burden these new homes place on city services. But what has kept the city from collecting the development fees it could to cover this additional expense? For instance, in this time period, the city has lost $1.2 million in Park and open space reserves. As far as this budget item is concerned, thankfully that oversight is now being charged against future development. This is a good precedent to follow: Expenses incurred by new development do need to be covered and who better to bear this burden than those who profit by it? As for existing residents, we already pay the price in increased ambient noise levels and more traffic on Bull Mountain Road. For instance, it has become quite the dicey affair to jump on our secondary collector as sleek motor cars bound around the curves and jump up and over the hills. Surely annexation is inevitable but really the brunt of the burden ought to be borne by those who profit by converting farmland to suburbia. council mail councilmail - SuILMountain Annexation Public Testimony Page L From: Julie Russell <jrussell@e-Vacations.com> To: craigd@ci.tigard.or.us"' <craigd@ci.tigard.or.us> Date: 12/3/03 4:14PM Subject: Bull Mountain Annexation Public Testimony Hi, 1 just have a question what Bull Mountain residents not currently in the city, participate in any of the following organizations or committees? As Neighborhood Planning Organization members * As Citizen Involvement Team (CIT) facilitators * As Community Connectors - neighborhood liaisons to the City * On the Planning Commission * In the "Tigard Beyond Tomorrow" vision process as survey respondents, Task Force members, and Action Committee members Also the urban service agreement I received from Washington County shows no citizens from Bull Mountain were contacted regarding this agreement. I believe there was suppose to be public involvement in this agreement. This agreement provided the basis for the beginnings of this annexation, why were none of the residents notified? do hope the council will delay the annexation vote until the residents of Bull Mountain can be part of this process. We do not feel like we have been part of this process. Thank You, Julie Russell Jim December 3, 2003 RECEIVED C.O.T. City of Tigard Craig Dirkson, Acting Mayor Bill Monahan, City Manager DEC 0 8 2003 13125 SW Hall Administration Tigard, Or. 97223 Dear Honorable Council Members: I attended the public hearing pertaining to the annexation of Bull Mountain last night and since I am not an eloquent speaker as some people were last night I take this opportunity to put some of my thoughts to the pen. My family and I are deeply saddened by the demise of Mayor Griffith and we offer all our friends of Tigard our condolences. My home is at 14860 SW 149th Ave. off Bull Mt. Rd. and is surrounded by five acres of a small pond and wooded common area. The developer, Pat Clickner did an excellent job of planning the small development where we live; however, she fell short financially in completing the project properly and the County of Hillsboro was derelict in allowing her performance bond to expire without completing the final lift on the private road. The title companies are giving clear titles to unsuspecting buyers of homes moving in and out of this development. They will very soon have to pay for a road way that the county made a platting condition for completion and ignored the developer obligation by letting her bond expire. I heard testimony from young and old alike and I believe that you have fair intentions of implementing dialogue with everyone, and I realize that it will be impossible to please everybody. The elderly who have been around a long time on Bull Mountain tend to resist any change and can not see the need to pay for progress. They forget that for most of them progress has built substantial estate values for them. I will be seventy in Jan., 2004, but don't include myself as an old foggy. My business is in Tigard, my daughter attends Tualatin High School, she is an IB honors student in the most egregiously corrupt mafia-like run school district in the State of Oregon..lack of dialogue and bonding abuses is the legal basis that I personally and financially support the replacement of the present superintendent and his lackeys. Your present attitude of entering into fair dialogue with the membership of our CP04b citizens of Bull Mountain encourages me and many highly educated and conservative and successfull citizens to support the future annexation of Bull Mountain into the City of Tigard. I must tell you all, as was my recommendation at public hearing last night that all building permits in the areas to be annexed must be suspended till annexation is complete for basically two reasons: One, the health and welfare of the public is in constant danger of ill planned traffic flows. .I walk with my dog at least 3-4 times a week along Bull Mountain Road and have a first hand observation of the speeding and reckless driving, ie. very excessive speeding in 25mpr hazard zones all the time. The traffic and driving abuses get much worse every year; two, builders and D developers pay System Development Charges in most jurisdictions. The money collected with the building permits normally assists in amelioration of most of the traffic and social problems confronting the areas benefitted. If the annexation should be delayed, which it should be till all input and questions are satisfactorily addressed, then the County of Hillsboro is failing to properly address safety and the best interest of the citizens of Bull Mountain by allowing further building, including and especially the new Alberta Ryder public school and should be injunctioned by law to be disallowed to issue new building permits till funding of needed expanded services is properly addressed. The poor planning and the appearance of developer favoritism by the county places my family and all my neighbors, lives in constant jeopardy. I hope that the city and the county can get together on this issuer as legal action is costly and burdensome on everyone; however, I promise you that I will support financially all measures to bring this matter to the table! We all have the opportunity to work together for everyone to benefit with this new proposed partnership. We want a strong, intelligent, vigorous partner in the merger. I realize that it is easy to make accusations of fiscal mismanagement by governmental officials without entirely understanding all the problems confronting you, but I can generally say that most of the people of Bull Mountain would like to know how you plan to regain financial health. When you enter into a partnership both partners should be good financial risks. Would you make a deal with a "Flake?" Governments almost without exception are run by politicians, not businessmen who spend like drunken sailors when revenue income is good and forget to cut back when times are slim. This is because you guys generally live in a different world from the rest of us who pay your bills. Tigard has the potential of being a better place to live than its neighbor, Lake Oswego, but it will take true quality ingenuity and planning to obtain such lofty ambitions. Fortunately you have at your disposal some of the smartest and best qualified and educated people in the world at your disposal in the citizens of Bull Mountain, if congeniality is obtained. Having such potential talent to assist your future needs and aspirations is worth one hundred fold any monetary gain to you will bring from taxation alone! I own half interest in a building company in Hillsboro that has done very well for the home buyers and our company financially paying these system development fees. Bull Mountain cannot be deprived of one cent of needed development fees that are not being collected by the County at this time! I truly believe that an injunction against further issuance of permits can be put into place! I am including a little study that I performed with some outside assistance pertaining to public trust and tax free bonding that you all should read through at least twice. It is very important that all public officials from the State level to the lowest jurisdictions become aware of the potential hazards that lurch pertaining revenue obligations and the bubble waiting to burst ! Bonding is good as far as it goes, but the abuses are increasingly rife and ubiquitous portrayed by greed and power that in short order the ceiling will fall many abusers! Very Tr ly Y,o/~u /J, Thomas A. Jac THE MULTIBILLION SCAM & WALL STREET'S INSIDE JOKE It is ironic that megabillion dollar scams promulgated by large, well known financial institutions can go on for so many years, and in some cases decades before they attract public attention. But what's worse is that insiders and regulators are more often than not, aware of the dishonest and illegal behavior, but seem to be afraid to "rock the boat". The great stock market scam of the '90s is a poignant case in point. The SEC even produced a study indicating that 1% of analysts' ratings were "sell" advisories. Studies don't seem to be worth much without public outcry. While stock prices kept going up and people were making money no one cared about the chicanery. The insiders just laughed over the "One Big Joke". Too late, when five trillion is destroyed, and that really wasn't funny in the end!! A similar pattern was demonstrated with the Great Insurance Cover-up in the late '80s. Giant insurance companies, the so called guardians of their policy holder from risk were taking on much more risk than their policy holders would ever think about taking on for themselves - by overinvesting in junk bonds and other imprudent schemes - "pie-in-the-sky"! Again, it was ironic that "experts" at the major rating agency, A.M. Best, was very aware of the junk bond problem; furthermore, they provided highly detailed technical reports pertaining to the financial decline of the insurance industry in their trade journal. What happened to the public? Was it warned? No, they avoided issuing warnings about the very insurance companies that were the worst offenders, according to the GAO. Worst of all, experts at state level insurance departments countrywide were quite aware of the junk bond fiasco in process at the time. They set up a special office in New York to monitor and track the safety of the bonds life insurance companies were buying at the time. Rather than expose the offending life companies' imprudence, they simply cooperated with the industry to cover up the massive scams. When the truth emanated out it was too late again. Six million policy holders got shafted! Another potential disaster lurks in the shadows of deception potentially far more damaging than the aforementioned! r Tax Exempt Securities The junk bond fraud and similar to the tech disaster of Wall Street, a subtle and insidious danger has been a cloud over our heads for years which is much more significant potentially haunting d investors over fifty years of age: Tax-exempt securities issued by ? municipalities and state governments. They aren't satisfied with j the taxes they collect from their constituencies and go to Wall Street to surreptitiously skirt and deceive tax payers. This policy has been over used and abused! In time, when the truth comes out, millions of American investors, especially retired and fixed income investors will get the shock of their lives! No one knows if a Municipal Bond Market failure will be as bad as the Junk Bond one, or the Tech Debacle. It is impossible to prognosticate when the Muni Bond problem will surface. The dangers of cover-up that threaten investors and the whole economic system is presently being exposed. Naive investors by the millions desperately seeking safe tax sheltered bonds are being promoted this problematic panacea without proper disclosure in most cases. Municipal bonds feature exemption from local and federal income taxes, as well as many other guarantees. As a consequence this tax-exempt bond in the US has grown geometrically to over 50,000 Local Govts. and agencies - over one and a half million different issues with over $1.5 trillion, and held by over five million investors --mostly over fifty years old. (Data from Thompson Financial). Tax exempts are promoted more heavily by brokers, more than any other type of fixed-income investments. Ratings, safety and tax-exemption are promoted: Insurance is especially emphasized, which is to guarantee the bonds against default by the issuer. Few are aware of the fact that much of the tax-exempt market is built on an insidious deception: This is because it is subtle and more complicated than other Street deceptions previously discussed - no less deceptive. BUYING AN AAA RATING In the past, Wall Street rating services graded tax-exempt bonds on their own merits. Financially weak jurisdictions got weak ratings, while strong ones got higher ratings as deserved - this made sense; but, today it's not that way. For example, the mayor of a city has a pet project to build, say a new city hall for $12 million, and the city council oks the deal for him. The city manager or his appointee has to raise the money by issuing tax- exempt bonds. A problem then arises, the city's latest Moody's and Standard & Poor rating is low, a BBB, on the verge of slipping to BB - junk bond status. The chance of raising funds with this rating at a feasible interest rate isn't very auspicious. Now the city manager is introduced Wall Street "Slick" who tells him is all he has to do is sign up for muni bond insurance (similar to PMI insurance for high risk home loans). "Slick" continues, that his company guarantees the interest and principal payments to the people who buy the bonds, and "Slick's" company passes onto the city their own bond rating of AAA as rated by Moody's and S&P. The city manager questions "Slick"," don't the investors see our poor rating and question this kind of a deal?" "Slick" replies that few investors ever see the low credit rating---that they only look at his company ratings, AAA , "you will be considered part of our family, and that's it", "Slick" promises. Going on to make assurances that his company stands ! behind the enhanced rating for the life of the bond, even if the city's rating continues to decline ...he promises that they can never cancel the deal. Now, what happens if S&P and Moody's lowers "Slick's" company rating - what happens? "Slick" assures the city manager that his company's rating has always been AAA, and always will be. They guarantee thousands of tax-exempts all the time. If Moody's or S&P down grades us, they would be lowering the grade of all bonds previously issued in the big swoop, imagine the chaos in the muni bond market. Every investor holding enhanced bonds would suffer huge losses. As the market would reflect loss of confidence. "Slick" concludes, that Moody's & S&P would never downgrade them, theyr'e not that stupid. BASIC FLAWS OF MUNI BOND INSURANCE Number one: Investors are invariably given the wrong ratings: The underlying municipal bond rating is rarely disclosed, unless enhancement isn't needed. The rating normally given is strictly the insurance company's rating. This is illogical. The actual rating of the bond should be given first, then the rating enhancement of the insurance company, as secondary...usually, the true rating of the bond is suppressed or disguised. Poor disclosure is a source of serious deception and is of great concern. The Great Stock Market Scam and the earlier Great Insurance Cover-up created a bubble of false confidence. The truth usually comes out unexpectedly, and the bubble pops. Panic ensues, markets collapse and the bi# players, the "laughing boys" go down the tubes. Wall Street promoters would have learned by now that good business wisdom dictates the truth up front to avoid surprises - they haven't yet! Number two: Tax-exempt muni bonds continue to maintain AAA rating, even if they become junk status. Muni bond insurers usually don't enhance junk bonds, but they do insure a large number of BBB munis - which are one grade above junk bond status. Should a deeper recession ensue many BBB rated municipalities will probably fall on hard times, and all it would take is one downgrade in their basic ratings, and all of a sudden the muni bond insurers would be guaranteeing P&I payments on a huge number of what now are junk rated bonds. Number three: It is impossible to estimate long-term risks safely. Bond enhancements are irrevocable for the life of the instrument - up to thirty years - a lot can happen in even five years, let alone thirty years. Communities rich today can be poor tomorrow. Plant closings, rail and highway shifts, etc. are just of the few things that can happen. Worldwide recessions cause failing tax revenues as we are presently seeing in Oregon, but in most other states and cities in the United States, also. This could easily start a wave of muni defaults. It is quite debatable if the muni bond insurers could cap massive flood of defaults at one time. No one really can surmise the outcome as the last time there was a severe muni bond crises in this country bond enhancement was nonexistent. Number four: Invariably, over rated muni bonds are overpriced, fetching lower interest rates than deserved. When the bond is downgraded its market price immediately falls to reflect the downgrade. One who owns the bond has two choices: 1) Sell at a loss, or 2) hold and risk lower price, even default - either choice isn't too pretty. Number five: Incest - The bond rating company and insurance rating company are one and the same. S&P and Moody's which rate munis also rate the muni bond insurers; this could be a serious conflict of interest. Should S&P or Moody's downgrade just one muni bond insurance r company, they would immediately have to downgrade its entire insured muni bond portfolio. This would affect the bond pricing along with undermining the business itself which undermines the high fees charged to each muni bond issuer seeking bond grade enhancement.. Fees charged range from $2, 000. 00 to $55, 000. 00 & up depending on the size of the bond issue. Each municipal bond insurer covers up to $25 billion in par rated insured bond issues. should the rating agency lower the grade of the insurer it would immediately antagonize thousands of covered bonding jurisdictions which should also be down-graded. One institution downgraded by the rating agency potentially jeopardizes millions of revenue dollars. The Great Insurance cover-up witnessed this situation, A.M. Best and S&P waited to downgrade weak insurance companies until it was too late... consequently hoards of investors got boxed in unfairly. Number six: the incest runs deeper: Muni bond insurers that insure the munis are often heavily invested in the same bonds they insure with their own money. A disaster in the muni bond market deals them a double-whammy with more claims and falling investment revenues at the same time. Number seven: A shaky Hypothesis: All three rating agencies (A.M Best, Moody's, and S&P) base a great deal of their bond insurance rating scheme on one single, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation: "The Postwar quality of Municipal Bonds," by George H. Hempel, University Michigan, 1964, with an update by George H. Hempel titled "The Postwar Quality of State and Local Debt," published 1971. The author's observations and conclusions were excellent for the time periods covered; however, there have been major changes in muni bond finances - mostly for the worse. In the 1960-1970s total revenues received by state and local governments normally exceeded the total debt outstanding - excellent! Meaning one year of revenues could, in theory, pay off all their debts: the modern era has harbored the reverse: The total debt outstanding incurred by state and local governments invariably exceeds revenue. The simple conclusion appears that the tax-exempt bond industry is in a very precarious bubble situation. The question regarding noninsured munis comes to mind. Since the insured muni bond market is problematic, what is the situation with the noninsured bond market? the municipal bond market is the nation's least regulated securities market, while investors, the majority who are older citizens, hold over $16 trillion worth of these bond debt issues. Stock companies that you invest in can be easily monitored because of SEC. reporting requirements. It's a different story with municipal bond investments. Municipalities don't disclose financial information more than once a year with often six month extensions..additional reporting lag. Financial information from them is usually very hard to obtain because it isn't filed with the SEC. and worse, some bond issuing districts fail to release any financial information or reports at all. The Bond Market Association has formed a task force to help and encourage better disclosure practices. The vast size of the market, ranging from villages looking to buy swamp buggies to states funding power generators, etc., makes this a slow and probably useless endeavor at best. The assumption has always been that investing in a government entity, no matter how small was somehow safer that investing in a private corporation. Past disasters belie that notion. take a look at NY City, Mid -1970s, the SEC's investigation of the city's fiscal crises disclosed that the city staff had not disclosed serious financial problems, while at the same time the city was selling over $4 billion in short term securities. WPPS: You'll recall Washington Pub. Power Supply System, the SEC. discovered that the Wall Street underwriter of WPPS Financing issue failed to examine the issuer's disclosures to determine the accuracy of their statements to investors. Wall Street blindly and blatantly sold $2.5 billion in revenue bonds. There was ongoing litigation at the time which was not disclosed and ultimately who do you think got the shaft? By the time S&P had placed the bond on its Credit Watch list it was too late again for investors. This can and probably will at some time or other happen again!! The stories of malfeasance go on and on, and continuing becomes repetitive and boring. Could the bond debacle of the 130s be repeated? According to George H. Hempel, during the great depression, 15.4% or $2.85 billion of state and local debt had defaulted, by 1932; that was in three years, and by 1938, $5.5 billion defaulted, about 30% total munis issued outstanding. Some defaults lasted a short time, while others were never resolved. Wall Street will tell you this can never happen again. They say the situation was much worse in the 30s; and they continue to argue that safeguards are in place, ie. insurance, and better attention to ratings will prevent a 30s upheaval; however, these safeguards are not only flawed, but basically a large part of the problem itself. Four major structural weakness in the muni bond market offset the added strength and cloud its future. Weakness one: Big deficits even in the best of times. In the best of times overspending is the general norm and debt tends to mushroom out of control: The economic fall always discloses fiscal excesses - Oregon at this time fits this profile very well. If we enter a severe recession, many borrowers may not be able to meet their obligations, and the possibility of chain reaction defaults could very easily ensue. Weakness two: Over abundance of shadowy unrated debt issues with rising failure rates. Between 1990 - 2001, there were 917 municipal issues that defaulted - totalling $9.8 billion owing. 780 of those or 85%, were unrated issues (Source: S&P's J.J. Kenny Gjjkenny.com/jjkenny/freepage.html). Weakness three: Illiquidity. The US Treasury market for securities is very volatile and liquid, however, the trading volume in individual munis is very small. A confidence crisis in munis would cause panic, down-grades and large pricing disparities, trapping most investors with losses. This is of concern to investors, institutions and muni bond insurance companies alike. As a matter of fact the same investments that many people selected for insurance protection could be among the investments that suffer largest declines. Market movements can gap so fast that there is no time for shelter or safety. Weakness four Ratings Inflation. Investors trying to avoid financial dangers rely very heavily on the ratings of their muni bonds. Ratings suffer from the following short-comings. 1) Insured muni bonds are automatically assigned AAA rating of the Insurance Co. 2) Rating agencies are paid very high fees from the borrowers to rate the muni bonds. If too many are poorly underwritten they lose business to competition. 3) Most rating agencies give the bond issuers the right of having their ratings suppressed if their ratings look bad or if the issuer is unhappy with the results of the actual rating. 4) Wall Street ratings make the mistake of assuming that large operating losses and other weakness affect only the unrated or low-rated bond issues. That is totally wrong. The entire muni bond market is affected if any one major segment suffers malaise. Panic quickly spreads from one sector to another, and price decline in unrated bonds forces parallel declines in rated issues. No impenetrable shield protects bad issues-from the good ones. 5) Finally, recent years have shown several periods when the average ratings are upped at the same time the financial status of the average municipalities were actually down: Ratings inflation of the worst breed. The overall conclusion is that it is true, most investment grade tax-exempt bonds are not in danger of default as they were during the period of the Great Depression; but, without question, they are far more dangerous than Wall Street Companies try to make investors believe. I have submitted an example of how a bond is floated by a BBB rated company, a utility company in this case, to get their bond offering enhanced for favorable terms, as a real life example of how insurance basics actually work. Calpine Subsidiary Closes $301,658,000 Secured Notes Offering Pagel of 2 Tom Jacobs Fr6m: Joe Keicher Oke!cher@bctonline.comj Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 7:36 AM To: Rick+Barb Shaw; Edge Financial Co. INC.; Dave Steinick Subject: Calpine Subsidiary Closes $301,658,000 Secured Notes Offering H001 FINANCE 99Search - Finance Home - Yahoo! - Help PR Newswirc Welcome, spookers97004 [Sign Outl Money Manager - My Yahoo! View - Customi Financial News Enter symbol(s) r- Basic Symbol Lookup - ~$7Online Trades ' ' ± • Related Quote IrEngm Just 5500 to open • • CPN i-Oct @ iO:41am (C)Yahc 5.00 Press Release Source: Calpine Corporation 4.95 4.90 - Calpine Subsidiary Closes $301,658,000 Secured 4.85 loam 12pm 2pm aF Notes Offering CPN 4.96 +0.07 Ng Wednesday October 1, 8:30 am ET View Detailed Quote Delayed 20 mins Quote data provided by Reuters SAN JOSE, Calif., Oct. 1 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ Calpine Corporation (NYSE: CPN - News), a leading North American power company, today announced that Gilroy Related News Stories Energy Center, LLC (GEC), a wholly owned, stand-alone subsidiary of the Calpine subsidiary GEC Holdings, LLC, has received funding on its $301,658,000 of 4% CALPINE CORP Files SEC Senior Secured Notes Due 2011. The senior secured notes are secured by GEC's form 8-K. Other Events - EDGA J and its subsidiaries' 11 peaking units located at nine power-generating sites in Online (Mon Sep 29) northern California. The notes also are secured by a long-term power sales CALPINE CORP Files SEC agreement for 495 megawatts of peaking capacity with the State of California form 8-K. Other Events - EDGAJ Department of Water Resources, which is being served by the 11 peaking units. In Online (Fri Sep 26) addition, payment of the principal of, and interest on, the notes when due is insured Calpine says unit prices $300 _y an unconditional and irrevocable In, cial guaranty insurance policy that wac million in notes-Reuters issue slmultaneo wl the delivery of the notes. (Thu Sep zs) Calpine Subsidiary Announce Proceeds of the notes Pricing on $301.658.000 of Secured Notes Offering - PR offering (after payment Newswire (Thu Sep 25) transaction expenses, More including payment of the financla guaranty insurance premium will be used to By industry: Oil/energy, Utilitig relm urse costs incurred in connection with the Top Stories development and construction of the peaker Manufacturing Growth Slows projects. The noteholders_ September - Reuters (10:21 am) recourse is limited tot Residential Construction at iinancta guaranty insurance Record in Aug -Reuters (10:30 am po Icy an , insofar as ~ymen as not been made Stocks Up: ISM Data Not as ADVERTISEMENT Un~C el'3Q y, to the Weak as Feared - Reuters (10:19 10/1/03 Calpine Subsidiary Closes $301,658,000 Secured Notes Offering Page 2 of 2 assets of GEC and its am) not su sidiaries. alpine ii-has- -i guaranteed repayment of the Mortgage Refinancings Rise no es. Rates DI -Reuters (9:42 am) &ET PRaFEssioN,AL - - More CC EN YQU~;:' In connection with this offering, Calpine has Most-emailed articles received funding on a third s party preferred equity Most-viewed articles investment in GEC Holdings, LLC totaling approximately $74 million. f The 4% Senior Secured Notes Due 2011 have beert a er-eff a pa-cement under Rule 144A, have not been and will not be registered under the Securities Act of 1933, and may not be off r d in the U ' ed States- a sent re nor an applicable exem ion from registration requirements. This press release a no con er To --sell or a -o ici a ion o an offer to buy. Securities laws applicable to private placements under Rule 144A limit the extent of information that can be provided at this time. Source: Calpine Corporation Email this story - Set a News Alert Copyright ® 2003 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy - Tans of Service - Copyright Policy - Ad Feedback Copyright ® 2003 PR Newswire. All rights reserved4Republication or redistribution of PRNewswire content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of PRNewswire. PRNewswire shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. 10/1/03 ----Fr-: 2, - - 77-7 47~ t ~ Mr. Thomas Jacobs 14860 SW 139th Ave 1'2.6,. i'886'643.52... Tigard OR 91224.1460 Qfl:; ~ - . D f.G•, ..:0.3.•..0..3, VU6MAILED. FROM TIGARD,OR-,', 7,2 2'3,';~ 2 ' - err t.. t CITY OF TIGARD BILL MONAHAN, CITY MANAGER • 13125 SW HALL TIGARD, OR. 97223 ~A , RECEIVED r~ 203 December 4, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD PLANNINGIENGINEERING Tigard City Council Tigard, Oregon Subject: Bull Mountain Annexation I am providing this letter directly to each of you, that you might not delay action that you might otherwise take by letting the normal process bring this to your attention. I would be happy to personally discuss these comments, if any of you wish to do so. I wish to bring to your attention my submission of the proper interpretation of the'ORS 195 annexation statutes. I believe they are the correct interpretation and I know that other attorneys share this view. However, whether you believe my position or not, it puts Tigard in a very difficult position. If the City Council decides to continue along the path of interpreting the annexation statutes as they have been led to believe, then whether you proceed now or in November, the issue will be the same. That issue is whether the annexation statutes [ORS 1951 that the city is relying upon to annex Bull Mountain for the purposes of adding the annexed territory to the tax rolls really provide that authority. Because I know the undercurrent attitudes of Bull Mountain residents, I can guarantee that if you proceed as defined, it will be tested in the courts. Tigard has already suffered a great loss of public opinion in the ABOY building permit difficulty. This issue has the potential for the same significant results. It you proceed using this direction and lose, you can say goodbye to Bull Mountain forever. However, you must realize that you can under ORS 195 annex Bull Mountain to provide urban services, i.e. annex a service territory as provided in ORS 195.060 (1) (e). I believe that if you would provide for a parks service territory for Bull Mountain either under agreement with the county or by annexation (if the current agreements satisfy the statutory requirements for annexation of a parks service territory) and then demonstrate that you are truly interested in the Bull Mountain area and look for opportunities to provide other goodwill gestures (such as developing a view preservation policy for Bull Mountain), the goodwill will greatly help with an ORS 222 annexation at a later date. I do not know whether it would be successful, but it definitely would help. I recommend that you consult with some of the legislators and land use attorneys in evaluating the position I have stated. This would help the City Council to develop a proper strategy. If you delay for months other service territory opportunities will be lost to Bull Mountain and Tigard. Sincerely, Lavelle Day 14055 SW High Tor Drive Tigard, OR 97224 503-590-6201 i Comments for the Record on Bull Mountain Annexation by LaVelle Day (503-590-6201) 14055 SW High Tor Drive Tigard, OR 97224 December 4, 2003 Unfortunately, I must take exception to the interpretation of the ORS 195 annexation statutes provided at the beginning of the public hearing on Bull Mountain Annexation. I want these comments to be added to the public record, with a copy of a letter I am giving to the city council members for their consideration. My comments are not belligerent or emotional but are provided because of the inherent collision course between what has been provided to the city council and what is the correct interpretation of ORS 195 annexation statutes. Annexation authority is given to many different government entities for various purposes and scopes. The purposes and scopes are provided by the authorizing statutes as passed by the legislature. This concept is fundamental to the correct understanding of the ORS 195 annexation authority and the relationship between ORS 222 and ORS 195 annexation. I will address only the two annexation authorities as provided in ORS 222 and ORS 195 and not any others. The two can be identified as the following: 1. City total annexation provided by ORS 222. This annexation provides that the annexed territory becomes totally and completely a part of the city. The annexed territory is listed on the city tax rolls and is treated as any other territory in the city. 2. Urban Service Provider Annexation as provided in ORS 195. This authority is given to both cities and special districts. This authority is given to facilitate the economical and complete delivery of "urban services" to all communities in the state. The cities and special districts can annex "service territories". ORS 195 is almost always associated with ORS 196 and ORS 197. The language contained in these statutes often recites the three together. The titles of these chapters are as follows: Chapter 195 - Local Government Planning Coordination Chapter 196 - Columbia River Gorge; Ocean Resource Planning; Wetlands; Chapter 197 - Comprehensive Land Use Planning Coordination These statutes provided for the orderly development of land use and the providing of "urban services" throughout the state. The counties, cities and special districts (providing "urban services") are to cooperate and coordinate the land use planning and development and the r 7~ providing of "urban services". Special agreements are required between the entities with oversight functions and goal setting by a designated county or a Special District (such as METRO) and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. I am certain that all members of the city council are well familiar with these requirements. Understanding the legislative intent to provide "urban services" is necessary to understanding the scope and intent of the ORS 195 annexation statutes. Urban Services are defined in ORS Chapter 195.065 Agreements required; contents; county responsibilities. (4) For purposes of ORS 195.020, 195.070, 195.075, 197.005 and this section, "urban services" means: (a) Sanitary sewers; (b) Water; (c) Fire protection; (d) Parks, (e) Open space; (f) Recreation; and (g) Streets, roads and mass transit. This list is specific. This list of services and the orderly development of land use are the focus of the legislative intent of these 3 ORS chapters. This is important to understand. A city is concerned about many more things than "urban services", such as urban renewal, historical sites preservation, developing the downtown area, etc. But the focus of the legislature is the providing of the "urban services" as defined above. • The statute that provides for annexation in these chapters is provided below and is contained in the ORS 195 with the section heading: URBAN SERVICE PROVIDER ANNEXATION "195.205 Annexation by provider; prerequisites to vote; public hearing. (1) A city or district that provides an urban service [as defined above] may annex territory under ORS 195.020, i 195.060 to 195.085, 195.145 to 195.235, 197.005, 197.319, 197.320, 197.335 and 223.304": It is important to looking closely at ORS 195.060 cited above. ORS 195.060 (1) specifically requires that "units of local government and special districts that provide an urban service [as defined above]" "shall enter into urban service agreements that" [among other things] (e) Define the terms of necessary transitions in provision of urban services, ownership of facilities, annexation of service territory, transfer of moneys or project responsibility for projects proposed on a plan of the city or district prepared pursuant to ORS 223.309 and merger of service providers or other measures for enhancing the cost efficiency of providing urban services. Annexation of service territory means what it says, a city or a district may annex territory to add to its service territory "for enhancing the cost efjFiciency of providing urban services." The purpose for this annexation authority is to provide "urban services" in the most cost efficient way. This is a service territory annexation not a total annexation as provided for in ORS 222. Other Points to Consider 1. A city and a service district are given the same rights of annexation. It is not logical to believe that the legislature intended to give the rights of total annexation to the city and a less annexation authority to the district without stating that intent. They make no difference in this authority. II. Nowhere does the ORS 195 statutes state that ORS 222 is superceded by these ORS 195 annexation statutes. In fact the legislature was careful to state that the Department of Land Conservation and Development may NOT use it's planning authority to initiate an annexation of unincorporated territory under ORS 222. If the legislature had intended for these annexation statutes to supercede ORS 222, they would have so stated, but they have not done so. The correct interpretation of these annexation statutes makes a huge difference in the focus and approach that Tigard should be taking in this quest to add Bull Mountain to the Tigard tax rolls. If the City Council decides to continue along the path of interpreting the annexation statutes as they have been led to believe, then whether you proceed now or in November, the issue will be the same. That issue is whether the annexation statutes [ORS 1951 that the city is relying upon to annex Bull Mountain for the purposes of adding the annexed territory to the tax rolls really provide that authority. Because I know the undercurrent attitudes, I can guarantee that if you proceed as defined, it will be tested in the courts. Tigard has already suffered a great loss of public opinion in the ABOY building permit difficulty. This issue has the potential for the same significant results. It you proceed under this direction and lose, Tigard's reputation will suffer more and you can say goodbye to Bull Mountain forever. However, you must realize that you can under ORS 195 annex Bull Mountain to provide urban services, i.e. annex a service territory as provided in ORS 195.060 (1) (e). I believe if you would provide for a parks service territory for Bull Mountain either under agreement with the county or by annexation and then demonstrate that you are truly interested in the Bull Mountain area and look for opportunities to provide other goodwill gestures, the goodwill will help with an ORS 222 annexation at a later date. council mail councilmail -Bull Mountain Annexation _Page 1 From: "giroux" <wgi@pcez.com> To: <craigd@ci.tigard.or.us> Date: 12/8103 6:38AM Subject: Bull Mountain Annexation Dear Tigard City Councilors, My name is Paul Giroux and I've lived at 14645 Beef Bend Rd since 1984. 1 have attended several meetings regarding the annexation of the Bull Mountain since July 2001. Most of the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan and the information presented at the public meetings addresses the City of Tigard's concerns, objectives, and implementation rather than those of the residents of the annexed area. Much of the planning process has focused on how to assure the area is annexed, rather than whether it should be or not. The obvious reason for not annexing the area is that the overwhelming majority of the residents in the proposed annex area that have voiced an opinion have said they don't favor annexation. Even the city's 2002 survey showed only 30% to 37% of Bull Mountain residents favored annexation, and the testimony at the 1212103 city council meeting did not indicate that these percentages have increased. This is true even after the city has put a lot of time and money toward swaying the opinion in favor of annexation. It certainly appears that the city has been very careful to implement an annexation strategy that favors annexing the area regardless of the opinion of the residents of the annexed area. The city's sense from the early public meetings and survey, that most Bull Mountain residents opposed annexation, became the intelligence that drove the city and county to use the Annexation Plan method. I'm sure the city would have preferred to have a majority of the Bull Mountain residents favor annexation when it was first proposed, but rather than devise an annexation proposal that they would favor, the city focused their efforts op assuring annexation without a favorable majority of annexed residents. It seems that only recently is the city beginning to realize that there will be serious and enduring political and possibly legal consequences to this plan of action. The city has refused to make firm commitments regarding many of the concerns of the residents. They say parks on Bull Mountain will be a high priority, but won't commit to spending specific amounts or percentages of SDC's on them, or agreeing to a timetable for park development. Tigard's take over of the roads on Bull Mountain is very vague, and potentially costly to Bull Mountain residents. Tigard city manager, Bill Monahan, said at the 11119/03 informational meeting at Twality Middle School, that the city was considering having the county invoke remonstrances against property deeds to pay for road improvements before the city took them over. Many Bull Mountain residents are concerned about the city's historical approach to development planning, including density, engineered fill and terrain alteration, deforestation policies, and lack of beautification and other amenities for city approved development. Many Bull Mountain residents have additional concerns too, and these should be addressed before the area is annexed, rather than saying that they'll be dealt with after annexation. 1 I suggest that the city uses it's high level of publicly financed organization and personnel resources to work ! with the loosely organized residents of Bull Mountain to craft an annexation plan that makes the majority of Bull Mountain residents want to be part of Tigard before annexation is voted on. It's time to shift the focus from an administrative perspective of annexation to a citizen value based viewpoint. I feel powerless to stop the city's annexation of Bull Mountain, but 1'd rather join a happy family than be an unruly step child in a broken home. I hope you do the right thing. Sincerely, council mail councilmail - Bull Mountain Annexation Pa e 2 Paul Giroux 503-590-6040 MMMMW Cathy' Wheatley -Comments to be reviewed by the Council ahead of December 16th meeting Page 1 1 From: <StuByron@aol.com> To: <cathy@c1.tigard.or.us> Date: 12/4103 8:52AM Subject: Comments to be reviewed by the Council ahead of December 16th meeting Please make sure that the comments are reviewed by all council members. It seems on the surface, that postponing the vote until November is a good thing for the city and the citizens of Bull Mountain and Tigard. However, this will only extend the vote and allow the citizens of Both Bull Mountain and Tigard to coalesce around key issues if there is no progress made with the development codes, and the community plan prior to August, when the plans would need to be voted on in order to get on the November Ballot. This is something that once again, needs to follow the same format that has been taken in the past. The Annexation plan must be presented to the public along with open testimony and public forums prior to being on the November Ballot. However, all this work will be wasted if the city does not make some major changes. First the city should, as Mr. Franske pointed out, review the applicable code with some other attorneys to make sure that what they are doing is according to statue, not just review it with internal council. You know that the citizens of Bull Mountain will be doing this. Second, the city needs to look at the code in relation to the double majority vote. This wording is very nebulous in the statute and is subject to the legal interpretation. Again, we will be looking into this as well. We would prefer a double majority vote. This is possible and would pass if the the annexation plan is of benefit to the citizens of Bull Mountain. Third, the city needs to look at the development codes and the comp plans as well as any of the current development that is going on or planned at this time. It is possible to slow development as Lake Oswego, West Linn, and Wilsonville has done. It will be very difficult to tell those that live on 133rd that have just had a huge Morrissette development go in with 18 foot retaining walls in order to level the land; with no old growth trees remaining, because the land has been stripped, and with no improvements on the existing streets so that their children could walk to the new Alberta Rider school, that the annexation is a good thing when nothing within the cities development code has changed. 1 • These are not easy decisions to make. Some of these can be done now. Such as reviewing the Bull Mountain Community plan and upholding the subjective wording in the face of development. This is in appeal now and if rejected by the city staff, I am sure will be appealed as far as possible. The city council has alot of opportunity to make some significant changes that along with a new annexation plan will help to Complete the Community. The city could promote the appointment of citizens from Take back Tigard to be on the planning council. The city can perhaps look into raising the building fee permits on new construction until SDC's could be collected. The city can stop wasting money by stopping any further look into the Wall Street project since the railroad will not let this through. The city can completely rework the Cathy Wheatley - Comments to be reviewed by the Council ahead of December 16th meeting Page 2 . Annexation Plan instead of patting themselves on the back that this and that have been complete, and the number one thing that the city can do, it to ask for and get citizen involvement. Something that is the number one on the LCDC, and that the city of Tigard has not been doing for years. If the city does not look internally first in order to change the way they are doing business, then there will be no hope at convincing the people of Bull Mountain that a new and better annexation plan will do anything more than it would do now. I feel that you will need to show us by example in order to convince us that being part of Tigard is a good thing. As mentioned above, there are many opportunities to begin now. Unfortunately, promises will be as empty as the current annexation plan. Examples will lead the way. Thank you Stu Byron CC: <lisa@hamiltonrealtygroup.com>, <McVey.Family@verizon.net>, <ssherwood@goodneig h borcenter.org> 12- 12! L) --5 Subject: Statement to Tigard City Council Re: Proposed Bull Mountain Annexation Plan Date: December 2, 2003 Members of the Council: Our family has lived on Bull Mountain since March, 1975. We live on SW 164`h Avenue in an area called "The Woods." Our property is adjacent to the Urban Growth Boundary that now is in the recent addition to the Urban Growth Reserve. Our intention is to remain at this property indefinitely. We have been, and remain active, in the Tigard community and consider ourselves members of the Tigard community. We raised three sons here who attended Tigard public schools and graduated from Tigard High. Our oldest son graduated from Oregon State University and the other two graduated from the University of Oregon. All of our children participated in youth soccer programs for many years. They also participated in youth basketball and, briefly, little league baseball. Our family benefited greatly from our participation in these activities at the local school facilities and at the soccer fields in Cook Park. During the 28 plus years that we have lived on Bull Mountain, we have seen rapid growth that continues. This growth impacts our neighborhood streets as well as the streets, schools, parks and other facilities in Tigard. We have been dismayed that during all of this growth there hasn't been a commensurate building of parks, and bicycle and walking trails. We pay an extra county tax for "enhanced" sheriffs patrol. We use the city library, are involved at the Tigard Senior Center, use the Tigard city streets, and continue to enjoy use of Cook Park and other Tigard facilities, such as the Fanno Creek Trail for bicycling. We support the annexation of Bull Mountain into the city of Tigard. We are advocates of building strong communities and believe that healthy and vibrant communities are the key to a "livable, and sustainable" society. While we don't have any major gripes with Washington County, other than the lack of parks and trails, and inadequate sheriff patrols to control traffic violations, especially on Bull Mountain Road, we believe that annexation will enhance the community of Tigard. We also believe the residents of Bull Mountain will benefit from annexation by becoming a more integral part of the community. We believe that annexation will lead to improved services and more efficient delivery of services, especially police, parks, trails, and transportation. i Recent letters to the editor, and signs about the proposed annexation, contribute to the impression that Bull Mountain residents are selfish and greedy. A concrete example of this is the appearance of signs on Bull Mountain that use the extremely divisive language that "annexation is an act of war." Such extreme language does nothing to solve the pressing problems brought by rapid growth and economic disparity in our community. Increasing divisiveness and decline in civility is exacerbated by the cacophony of extreme, crude, and belligerent language throughout our society. The coarsening of American society and the increased focus on greed, selfishness, and "instant gratification" is detrimental to building a civil society. The present situation continues to foster an "us vs. them" attitude that serves only to be detrimental to a high quality of life. Annexation can strengthen the Tigard community and promote a greater awareness of "a sense of place." We encourage the council and all the members of this community to work toward building a stronger, more vibrant civil society and find a way to complete the annexation of Bull Mountain into the city of Tigard. Respectfully, Robert T. and M. Derene Meurisse 503-294-9402 C 325 P01 DEC 02 103 18:02 =Mon? 1Z~Z~a3 PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF TIGARD DECEMBER 2. 2003 copy C►?Y OF TIUARIi PL_AP1NI~1GlE:~Gt~`c~RiP' Remarks and Supporting Documents by Richard A. Franzke moo,- i5 _ rr..• •~S'•y~ ~ ~ ~:'~_y~F?t may. ^ "j wti } ~ : r . jai i• ~ ,'y ' ;yC t~ T4011 2001 13~~~ VE~E ~-~r ~ . ~~I3g.-- . fit.. , ' ~ - ry Ste` Caen$5~C sr';'~k~i'p ♦ ~.~,tQa_ 'r S• .•7~.j:iy~' ~ ~`~yF ~ • K `t ~;~r~ . ;ifs r c l .n u. 6. CONCLUSIONS AND KEY P O L I C Y I S S U E Summary of Conclusions • With the exception of the East Subarea, the majority of the Bull Mountain area is almost built out. • Assuming buildout of approximately 12,905 residents and 4,824 housing units for the entire Study Area, each subarea could reach buildout at different times. • Annexation under scenarios 2 and 3 would make the City an Entitlement Community in the future. Additional funding may become available to Tigard. • Revenue projections are mostly dependent upon growth. The rate and amount of growth determines revenue forecasts. • The Study Area has extensive capital needs, mostly road and park improvements. • Capital costs for road improvements and park improvements exceed revenue projections. Key Policy Issue Based on the above conclusions, the key policy issue is a capital improvement funding strategy. Possible strategies: • Use a portion of the General Fund to address capital improvements. • • Assistance from Washington County to address some or all of the capital improvement needs. • Form Local Improvement Districts to address specific capital improvement needs, such as parks and roads. • Delay improvement of streets until funding sources are available. • Obtain grant funding to address portions of capital improvements. • Identify the effective sequence of annexing specific subareas of Bull Mountain. Appendix E identifies the various methods of annexation available to the City of Tigard. NOVLzMBER 2001 THE BtfLL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION STUDY PAGE 18 Appendix E METHODS OF ANNEXATION PROVIDED BY ORS CHAPTER 222 Method: Phor consent Electron requirement Election r0quired? within City? requirement within territory to be annexed? City Initiated - By the legislative body of the City, on its own NO NO (City charter does YES motion [ORS 222.111(2)] (requires public hearing and not require, but Council Ordinance which will set election and effective date upon can send to election if passage) desired) Subject to referendum Owner Initiated - By petition to the legislative body of the YES NO (City charter does YES (tfprior city by owners of real property in the territory to be annexed. not require, but Council consent of [ORS 222.111(2)] (requires public hearing and Ordinance can send to election if electors and land which will declare the territory annexed upon condition that a desired) owners is not majority of votes cast in the territory being annexed favor provided, as annexation or as described in a, b or c below) Subject to referendum described in subsection a, b or c below, prior to action) a. 100% Owner and Majority of Electors - by written YES NO NO consent to annexation by all the owners of land and not less than 50% of the electors, if any, in the Subject to referendum territory [ORS 222.125] b. Triple Majority - by written consent to annex of YES NO NO more than half of the owners of land in the territory who also own more than half of the land in the Subject to referendum territory and of real property therein representing more than half of the assessed value of all real property in the territory [ORS 222.1701 (Triple majority discouraged because it may not be constitutional) c. Double Majority - by written consent of a majority YES NO NO of the electors in the territory along with the written consent of property owners of more than half the land Subject to referendum area in the territory. [ORS 222.170(2)] Island annexation - When territory not within a city is NO NO (City charter does NO surrounded by the corporate boundaries of the city, or by the not require, but Council corporate boundaries of the city and the ocean shore or a can send to election if stream, bay, lake or other body of water. except when the desired) territory not within a city is surrounded entirely by water. [ORS 222.750] Subject to referendum Page E - 1 . 'SY:If°i:J'~~"' :ter ~f•°i~,.1hY,'+~.. ' i~ A D - H IG TIGARD, OREGON s VOL.47 ■ No.48 75 CENTS AN E November 2003, Tigers aim at Some tasty gift ideas ■ Inside another title Summit Ridge decision due soon ■ Sports MITCH kids give thanks ■ B 8 e • Coun delays mexafton The City Council wants more input time to gather more input from citizens both annexation of the 1,400 acres in unincotporat- before putting the issue on the inside and outside the city. ed Washington County for two years, and it The council is still planning to hold a pub- was moving forward with a rapid timetable ballot, possibly next November lic hearing on the issue Dec. 2 but won't vote that would have put annexation on the ballot at on whether or not to put the measure on the the first opportunity. By BARBARA SHBRMAN March 9 ballot. "(Councilor) Brian (Moore) and I were sit- ; X the Times At Tuesday's work session, some of the ting on the fence," said Councilor Sydney councilors decided that they had not received Sherwood. "We wanted more input from Bull TIGARD - The City Council did an enough input to o forward with a vote so Mountain residents and from tbrupt abou %ce Tuesday evening, deciding . g people in the o delay its vote on putting the annexation of soon. city. We weren't hearing from city residents or t 3ull Mountain on the March ballot and to take The city has been seriously studying the 0 See AMIEXATION, A2 i , i Victory song rr~.~", ~ ~ ~ ~ nor • t' Se s „and f~ v~ annexation, tet as a in ~Y Dii~sel tax grab." residents are not in • annex, ' •1 pp OAS asked, "ls Moan m saidFt d tIe see hat afters O ttempa t o anntxj0T I-Iamilt0 Tn~ Mountain another ia explalne the city hesitan resident Lisa Bull M Monahn' "it made tll ~ buffed, taro ou can bring er were re fine the way we arc Way "We re unity Developrr► pp gull Moun you feel Y ,'°Thts Metzger a comment, this the only „ „ Monahan a and On Btnll a big Ole auflionty w response to w services;' COmm gull Mountain tmm Al the P.fter city - veered, Yes' the city 't need ne lamed that into irks ans c*fae inn _ we don exp had no en ns jnm $end bcans a we have aTs Is CoM+nued s that would for all in the decsio. asked, " M far as Director 111 it take to favor exation:' the only way resi- &M people in of am several group more is tin to have a say resident Stu Byron tam ad ci , P to form ogle t p0k to be Mountain tarn a tioa) to Bull mountain P e asked, ,I oW many ~e Iks The council decide and staff Pe , e are Bur mountain t that began std of gic of annexation works building mutual benefits (Of' a list Dick Frar>Tkutchase 20 or 30 to d . the methodology , m SDCstOP be co ap°ft1e mmifianons public le dissent- bave ' se a up for lost tem detail ks and recreation, ed readtn8, replied, "Y°u ounts to n'ak that why of inn lvlonahaharge higher am l 700 per un't will start col- ded are F~ ices. and we just diet den~ebat iWn otntart nand' ~ teal people cod and polices ere down to the wire, S0 little nnPu ° "Completing for the citizens You can, $1,4t}0 to $ , The count`! will „We were coming . ahead with t would work with ` unity' is We are losing imnmediacy nand eXed. able going wha ed. "Completing our CO. said a woman d andBull there,s the need, the o forward vetch annexatio comfort , We warm to talk about Ti is anrn feel exation C0 no gull M°awere created for g~ SDCs if we g $°on the aarea the county ultirn8 alttef to Sherwood sand tit the ann to Tigard, ive p to M Mountain i~gr the money t for may decide 200 ull I send 51,500 per unit one" later top rehear I according the g we ntil non 4 ballot, according Comp eats ago, has collected „EVery three m s' 've lost 512 1 . bes everyone. M°t11'ta'st 20 y says it can t .Tn money of gets mu vas ben The con he I,lovem endTuesdaY's ,.The county „ the moan ime and builtbthem how 99, and Iuly 2003, itut said, ,.The pe°1n1e issue on d did not att Monday at plan;' he said. es) of public ten on Ellis Moue cilors , is to Betty resident R ride if gal 194-Wlia r th was ill an atjpexation went Chang the issue { ~c Sherwood. Grid on rein p audience brought UP c goal Tigard . Mayor }ra ublic meeting the four coon ` got SDCs man ine ed *a le the cnty~e five is ill h851 n rep t whi citizens ft.-: TigVL azwd,residotit~~',d show ~t or a p but Wilson tse tin School,piiksen and 1410 telr► ' for ~ o • finan Moue TwalitY MMoore, Craig sod to annexation at the open safety, and DU f rs h 1'$y COMP06oaf~ is_ arm 's „ eYdl Analyses rovide 1$ to we utoaeY on County- ; ; ; the beliafits' to gonahain citizens oPP° on Bf T sll the nnfra are an Sherwood, om Bull Mountain re P lY lower patrol ' Washingt . . d capital mostly nau nd temp Sheri ~p residonts. rOVides 1.3-PW there ~~tdoI about the need he s yd eluded mi&ead house. 100 people, about amuxatn~ ter for every 1'+ T•igard now o sernCe .,Tigard needs co a on Bull Mountam". automatically a count`! Mmunily Fewer than tTWOW learn asked Why the ` on 1tan-j y100000 residents* Id a d 11 mote offs- ~cture needsout that roads tiro sions wi tak over ~ean to " Frame 1*.,. cers Pe d we WOU Ele Pointed „We've had discus would before e degts..s we .,~hak' 8uin resi donethod that allawa a sunP ors are not cow annexod;' he a PrioritY-one on arnnexation. the roads . said. the Ctrs irks' n, police ne a averago time in on what condiMonahan " B 1 h,,e exation-plan if Bull M urisdiction, OU my vote. e created the Monahan. `The According to minutes, utese of Bull l County ns 12 t „65 to 85 percent hin VL ha „Tn method, The Le CitylaturManager Ba we also did a ws as calls vrit , an X debated , an ea that thus complained gLO ci debated it for a ci determin mechanism Was one man c ty f 300 homes. The Caere . not a leg , cane method to be used. a o>yty in each area' available for a sepamce m l Chapter 222 - City Boundary Changes; Mergers; Consolidations; Withdrawals 2001 EDITION Y Urr mm5/CJ uC l ,310 *w =:49 1lujna.l • ~v ivu11un1 v a nnn~;a.n, 1v1t..1 x;41 ♦ to cm 11111.1111' a\, %V I I I lull 1%%;IIN ril!%..1 (11 •111 determining the permanent rate limit for the city following consolidation or merger as provided in section l l (3)(d), Article X1 of the Oregon Constitution. (4) The question of the consolidation or merger that is submitted to the electors of the city that has not previously approved operating taxes shall be considered approved by such electors if a majority of the votes cast are in favor of the consolidation or merger and: (a) At least 50 percent of registered voters eligible to vote in the election cast a ballot; or (b) The election is a general election in an even-numbered year. (5) ORS 250.036 applies to a ballot title for an election described in this section. (6) Notwithstanding that a majority of all electors voting on the question of consolidation or merger approve the consolidation or merger, the consolidation or merger shall not be considered approved if the voting participation requirements in subsection (4) of this section have not been met in the city to which this section applies. (7) If the city to which this section applies approves the consolidation or merger but the consolidation or merger is not approved by the other electors voting on the question or for some other reason does not occur, no permanent rate limit for operating taxes shall be established for the city as a result of the election. [1997 c.541 §358d] Note: 222.050 was added to and made a part of ORS chapter 222 by legislative action but was not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation. ANNEXATION OF CONTIGUOUS TERRITORY Note: Sections 3 and 10, chapter 737, Oregon Laws 1987, provide: Sec. 3. When annexation only with consent of owner before July 1, 2009. (l) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when property: (a) Is property on which no electors reside; (b) is zoned for industrial uses; (c) Has sewer and water lines paid for and installed by the property owner; and (d) Has an assessed valuation, including improvements, of more than $7 million that property can only be annexed by or to a city after the city receives a petition requesting annexation from the owner of the property. (2) Property described in subsection (1) of this section shall not be included with other territory as part of an annexation, or annexed under ORS 222.750, unless the owner of the property consents to the annexation in the form of a petition for annexation. (3) This section applies to property that, an September 27, 1987, was within the jurisdiction of a local government boundary commission. [1987 c.737 §3; 1997 c.516 §14] htto://www.leiz.stAte.or.us/ors/222.html 10/30/2003 503-294-9402 C 0?? P04/25 OCT 30 '03 15:50 • ua~nt.l ♦ trv ,niuutun Y ♦ n.ulp:..., rvr~.rr,t.r ♦ ul7tirr11iL11lt1111, fvl11111!'It•:11.'+ 1':15!C 4111 ?ll t Sec. 10. Section 3, chapter 737, Oregon Laws 1987, is repealed on July 1, 2009. [1987 c.737 § 10; 1989 c.226 § 1; 1997 c.226 § I] 222.110 [Repealed by 1957 c.613 § 1 (222.111 enacted in lieu of 222.110)] 222.111 Authority and procedure for annexation, generally. (1) When a proposal containing the terms of annexation is approved in the manner provided by the charter of the annexing city or by ORS 222.111 to 222.180 or 222.840 to 222.915, the boundaries of any city may be extended by the annexation of territory that is not within a city and that is contiguous to the city or separated from it only by a public right of way or a stream, bay, lake or other body of water. Such territory may lie either wholly or partially within or without the same county in which the city lies. (2) A proposal for annexation of territory to a city may be initiated by the legislative body of the city, on its own motion, or by a petition to the legislative body of the city by owners of real property in the territory to be annexed. (3) The proposal for annexation may provide that, during each of not more than 10 full fiscal years beginning with the first fiscal year after the annexation takes effect, the rate of taxation for city purposes on property in the annexed territory shall be at a specified ratio of the highest rate of taxation applicable that year for city purposes to other property in the city. The proposal may provide for the ratio to increase from fiscal year to fiscal year according to a schedule of increase specified in the proposal; but in no case shall the proposal provide for a rate of taxation for city purposes in the annexed territory which will exceed the highest rate of taxation applicable that year for city purposes to other property in the city. If the annexation takes place on the basis of a proposal providing for taxation at a ratio, the city may not tax property in the annexed territory at a rate other than the ratio which the proposal authorizes for that fiscal year. (4) When the territory to be annexed includes a part less than the entire area of a district named in ORS 222.510, the proposal for annexation may provide that if annexation of the territory occurs the part of the district annexed into the city is withdrawn from the district as of the effective date of the annexation. However, if the affected district is a district named in ORS 222.465, the effective date of the withdrawal of territory shall be determined as provided in ORS 222.465. (5) The legislative body of the city shall submit, except when not required under ORS 222.120, 222.170 and 222.840 to 222.915 to do so, the proposal for annexation to the electors of the territory proposed for annexation and, except when permitted under ORS 222.120 or 222.840 to 222.915 to dispense with submitting the proposal for annexation to the electors of the city, the legislative body of the city shall submit such proposal to the electors of the city. The proposal for annexation may be voted upon at a general election or at a special election to be held for that purpose. (6) The proposal for annexation may be voted upon by the electors of the city and of the territory simultaneously or at different times not more than 12 months apart. (7) Two or more proposals for annexation of territory may be voted upon simultaneously; however, in the city each proposal shall be stated separately on the ballot and voted on separately, and in the territory proposed for annexation no proposal for annexing other territory shall appear on the ballot. [1957 c.613 §2 (enacted in lieu of 222.110); 1959 c.415 § 1; 1967 c.624 § 13; 1985 c.702 §71 222.115 Annexation contracts; recording; effect. A contract between a city and a landowner relating to extraterritorial provision of service and consent to eventual annexation of property of the landowner htt7D://www.lea.state.or.us/ors/222.htmi 10/30/2003 503-294-9402 C 077 P06i25 OCT 30 '03 15:51 I. Impter I. IIV t itItI( nv t trtu>;~:., iet~t~uta. umM tClot um. V%, tuwta«ata rage v ut when all of the owners of land in that territory and not less than 50 percent of the electors, if any, residing in the territory consent in writing to the annexation of the land in the territory and file a statement of their consent with the legislative body. Upon receiving written consent to annexation by owners and electors under this section, the legislative body of the city, by resolution or ordinance, may set the final boundaries of the area to be annexed by a legal description and proclaim the annexation. [1985 c.702 §3; 1987 c.738 §1] Note: 222.125 was added to and made a part of ORS chapter 222 by legislative action but was not added to any smaller series therein. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation. 222.130 Annexation selection; notice; ballot title. (1) The statement summarizing the measure and its major effect in the ballot title for a proposal for annexation shall contain a general description of the boundaries of each territory proposed to be annexed. The description shall use streets and other generally recognized features. Notwithstanding ORS 250.035, the statement summarizing the measure and its major effect shall not exceed 150 words. (2) The notice of an annexation election shall be given as provided in ORS 254.095 and 254.205, except that in addition the notice shall contain a map indicating the boundaries of each territory proposed to be annexed. (3) Whenever simultaneous elections are held in a city and the territory to be annexed, the same notice and publication shall fulfill the requirements of publication for the city election and the election held in the territory. [Amended by 1967 c.283 §1; 1979 c.317 §4; 1983 c.350 §33; 1995 c.79 §80; 1995 c.534 §101 222.140 [Repealed by 1979 c.317 §26] 222.150 Election results; proclamation of annexation. The city legislative body shall determine the results of the election from the official figures returned by the county clerk. If the city legislative body finds that the majority of all votes cast in the territory favors annexation and the city legislative body has dispensed with submitting the question to the electors of the city, the city legislative body, by resolution or ordinance, shall set the final boundaries of the area to be annexed by a legal description and proclaim the annexation. [Amended by 1983 c.83 §23; 1983 c.350 §34; 1985 c.702 §9] 222.160 Procedure when annexation is submitted to city vote; proclamation. This section applies when the city legislative body has not dispensed with submitting the question of annexation to the electors of the city. If the city legislative body finds that a majority of the votes cast in the territory and a majority of the votes cast in the city favor annexation, then the legislative body, by resolution or ordinance, shall proclaim those annexations which have received a majority of the votes cast in both the city and the territory. The proclamation shall contain a legal description of each territory annexed. [Amended by 1983 c.350 §35; 1985 c.702 § 101 222.170 Effect of consent to annexation by territory; proclamation with and without city election. (1) The legislative body of the city need not call or hold an election in any contiguous territory proposed to be annexed if more than half of the owners of land in the territory, who also own more than half of the land in the contiguous territory and of real property therein representing more than half of the assessed value of all real property in the contiguous territory consent in writing to the annexation of their land in the territory and file a statement of their consent with the legislative body on or before the day: (a) The public hearing is held under ORS 222.120, if the city legislative body dispenses with submitting htinwunvw Leto ctate.nr.ua/ors/222.htm1 10/30/2003 napcer i y:) - Locai voverruueut r iaiuuitg %,uu1uu14L1U1► • u~~ ibject to ORS 197.610 to 197.625. '.)(a) The Land Conservation and Development Commission may require a local government to designate an urban reserve -ea during its periodic review in accordance with the conditions for periodic review under ORS 197.628. Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, the commission may require a local government to designate an urban :serve area outside of its periodic review if. k) The local government is located inside a Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area or a Metropolitan Statistical Area as !signated by the Federal Census Bureau upon November 4, 1993; and 3) The local government has been required to designate an urban reserve area by rule prior to November 4, 1993. i) In carrying out subsections (1) and (2) of this section: t) Within an urban reserve area, neither the commission nor any local government shall prohibit the siting on a legal parcel f a single family dwelling that would otherwise have been allowed under law existing prior to designation as an urban :serve area. The commission shall provide to local governments a list of options, rather than prescribing a single planning technique ensure the efficient transition from rural to urban use in urban reserve areas. t) For purposes of this section, "urban reserve area" means lands outside an urban growth boundary that will provide for: i) Future expansion over a long-term period; and The cost-effective provision of public facilities and service within the area when the lands are included within the urban rowth boundary. [1993 c.804 §19; 1999 c.622 §6] IRBAN SERVICE PROVIDER ANNEXATION 95.205 Annexation by provider; prerequisites to vote; public hearing. (1) A city or district that provides an urban zrvice may annex territory under ORS 195.020, 195.060 to 195.085, 195.145 to 195.235, 197.005, 197.319, 197.320, 97.335 and 223.304 that: a) Is situated within an urban growth boundary; and b) Is contained within an annexation lean adopted pursuant to ORS 195.020, 195.060 to 195.085, 195.145 to 195.235, 97.005, 197.319, 197.320, 197.335 an 223.304. 2) A city district may submit an annexation pJAU to a vote under subsection (5) of this section only if, prior to the ubmission of the annexation plan to a vote: a) The territory contained in the annexation W"is subject to urban service agreements amonji0ppropriate counties anci ities and the providers of gLbgn services within the territory, as required by ORS 195.065 and 195.070, and: A) Such urban service agreements were in effect on November 4, 1995; or B) hey exeressly stale that the may be relied upon as a prerequisite of the annexation method authorized b O 95 020, 5.0 to 15.085, 195.145 to 195.235, 197.005, 197.319, 197.320, 197.335 and 223.304; and 6) The territory contained in the annexation plan ii j,subiect.to an agreement between the-city and county addressing fiscal if the annexation is by a city and will cause reductions in the county property tax revenues by operation of section lb, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. 3) Prior to adopting an annexation lthe governing body of a city or district shall hold a public hearing at which time nresied persons may appear on the question of establishing the annexation plan. 4) The governing body of the city or district shall cause notice of the hearing to be published, once each week for two .uccessive weeks prior to the day of the hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation in the city or district. 5) If after the public hearing required under subsection (3) of this section, the governing body of the city or district decide! o proceed with the annexation agni, it shall cau a the annexation plan to be submitted to the electors of the city or di ct and to the electors of the territory nroDOSe to be annexed under e_ aaexat`on w1aY. The propose annexation lean may be toted upon at a general election or at a special election to e e for that purpose. [1993 c.804 §13] :95.210 Election procedures. (1) The statement summarizing the measure and its major effect in the ballot title of a )roposal for adoption of an annexation pJ.%n shall contain a general description of the boundaries of each territory proposed )e annexed. The description shall use streets and other generally recognized features. Notwithstanding ORS 250.035, the tatement summarizing the measure and its major effect shall not exceed 150 words. 2) The notice of an annexation lean election shall be given as provided in ORS 254.095 and 254.205, except that in additic he notice shall contain a map indicating the boundaries of each territory proposed to be annexed. [1993 c.804 § 14; 1995 c. X72; 1995 c.534 §9] 195.215 Election certification; order. (1) The governing body of the city or district shall determine the results of the .lection from the official figures returned by the county clerk. If the governing body of the city finds that a majority of all c he votes cast in the territory and the city favor the annexation planes then the governing body, by resolutton or ordinance, ;hall proclaim the a option of the annexation lean. The goveming body of the district shall certify the results of the electio o the appropriate county governing body. When a majority of all of the votes in the t~yrand district are in favor of the annexation plan, the county governing body by order shall so declare. The proclamation or order declaring approval of the annexation Mla~n shall contain a legal description of each territory annexed. 2) Annexation of particular tracts of territory shall take effect in accordance with the provisions of the adopted annexation )Ian. [1993 c.804 §15] 195.220 Annexation plan provisions. (1) An annexation lean adopted under ORS 195.205 shall include: a) The timing and sequence of annexation. b) Local standards of urban service availability required as a precondition of annexation. e) The planned schedule for providing urban services to the annexed territory. L il) The effects on existing urban services providers. K e) The long-te__= of the annexation lean. a 2) An annexation plan shall be consistent with all applicable comprehensive plans. [1993 c.804 §16; 1997 c.541 §341] 1 195.225 Boundary commission review; action; plan amendment; election. (1) In areas subject to the jurisdiction of a ocal government boundary commission, the boundary commission shall conduct an advisory review of an annexation plar 'or conformity with annexation plan requirements set forth in ORS 195.220, 199.462 and the rules of procedure of the Lan -onservation and Development Commission. 2) If a boundary commission finds that an annexation plan does not comply with ORS 195.220, 199.462 or the procedural -ales of the commission, the boundary commission, by order, shall disapprove the annexation plan and return the plan to tl- ;overning body of the city or district. The order of the boundary commission that disapproves an annexation plan shall iescribe with particularity the provisions of the annexation plan that do not comply with ORS 195.220, 199.462 or the )rocedural rules of the commission and shall specifically indicate the reasons for noncompliance. MME , •.v air .v ~ J. ®•~s ~9s. ohs 1) For'purposes of ORS 195.020, 195.070, 195.075, 197.005 and this section, "urban services" means: i) Sanitary sewers; r Water; Fire protection; 1) Parks; t► L-) Open space; f) Recreation; and Streets, roads and mass transit. i) Whether the requirement of subsection (1) of this section is met by a single urban service agreement among multiple roviders of a service, by a series of agreements with individual providers or by a combination of multiprovider and single rovider agreements shall be a matter of local discretion. [1993 c.804 §3] )5.070 Agreement factors. (1) The following factors shall be considered in establishing urban service agreements under RS 195.065: Financial, operational and managerial capacity to provide the service; The effect on the cost of the urban service to the users of the service, the quality and quantity of the service provided ai e ability of urban service users to identify and contact service providers, and to determine their accountability, with ease: ) Physical factors related to the provision of the urban service; ) The feasibility of creating a new entity for the provision of the urban service; ) The elimination or avoidance of unnecessary duplication of facilities; Economic, demographic and sociological trends and projections relevant to the provision of the urban service; The allocation of charges among urban service users in a manner that reflects differences in the costs of providing L -vices to the users; r i Matching the recipients of tax supported urban services with the payers of the tax; 3 The equitable allocation of costs between new development and prior development; and q u Economies of scale. J The extent of consideration of the factors set forth in subsection (1) of this section is a matter of local government and :cial district discretion. [1993 c.804 §4] 5.075 Agreement provisions and considerations. (1) Urban service agreements entered into under ORS 195.065 shall vide for the continuation of an adequate level of urban services to the entire area that each provider serves. If an urban vice agreement calls for significant reductions in the territory of a special service district, the urban service agreement 11 specify how the remaining portion of the district is to receive services in an affordable manner. Units of local government and special districts that enter into an urban service agreement shall consider the agreement's `ct on the flnnneial intonAttr and DRAFT 9 26 03 Table 3. Bull Mountain: Service Standard Changes Following Annexation Fire Protection dt Emergency Services Tualatin Valley Fire and No Rescue Mass Transit TriMet No. j/ Building and Development Services City of Tigard No. Tigard now provides these services for Plan Area through an agreement with Washington County. The agreement will cease but Tigard continues same services. Recreation No provider. Tigard does not No. Not currently provided. provide recreation services. However, Tigard has a Park and Recreation Advisory Board that can examine the issue in the future. Schools Annexation does not change school district boundaries. !ja Oft f -2 5.4 z. ff'o- Sanita Sewer Clean Water Services O of Tigard Y No. ~ Water (Tigard Water District City of T' rd No. Street Light Maintenance City of Tigard No. (Washington Coup Storm Sewer Mean Water Services City of T' No. Road Quality Maintenance* City of Tiga No. However, the Tigard Urban (Washington Count}) Service Agreement (TUBA) requires (*Actions to maintain pavement quality) the County to improve individual roads to a pavement condition index (PQ) of at least 40, with all roads averaging at least 75, prior to transferring the roads and service. Parks and Open Space (NO ry of Tigard Washington Yes; 8 acres/ 1,000 people. unty does not provide these services to unincorporated areas. Street Maintenance - (W n City of Tigard Yes. Mowing roadside grass and County through the Urban Roa brush (strip and ditch line). Dust Maintenance District) abatement on graveled roads. Vegetation removal for vision clearance. Crack sealing and road shoulders on 4-yeu cycle. Police (Washington CountyEnhanced Cary of Tigard Yes. Additional S officers/ 1000 Sheriff Patrol District) people (city standard is 1.5 officers/ 1000 . Community Development - Long City of Tigard. This includes Yes. Staff serves smaller area than Range Planning (Washington Gounq). cemprehemitie planning, such as County, focuses on local projects. master plans. The 1983 Bull Annexation will allow the City to plan Mountain Community is the for growth on Bull Mountain with an operative p as o updated comprehensive plan for the County has for the Plan Area. entire community. M E Bw. MouNrAIN ANNExkmoN PLAN - PAGE 8 ter . r .r 7j .a =h •i I I 1. f i' ANNEXATION - LEGAL AND PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS i . f Andrew Stamp r i - f 9 I . ' r: decision because landowners had not sustained an "injury in fact" as a result of the approval of an annexation of neighboring property). Of course, Utsey does not change anything for purposes of LUBA review. See Friends of Yamhill County v. Yamhill County, 41 Or LUBA 247, 250 (2002); Troy v City of Grants Pass, 41 Or LUBA 112,114-15 (2001); Doob v. Josephine County, 41 Or LUBA 569,571-72 (2001). However, post Utsey, it appears that a petitioner who lost a challenge to an annexation at LUBA would not be able to seek judicial review of that decision unless the petitioner can demonstrate a practical effect on that person's rights. II. Types of Annexations. 1. Annexations by State Legislature. Annexations may be conducted directly by the state legislature. See Mid-County Future Alternatives Comm % v. City of Portland, 310 Or 152, 795 P2d 541 (1990) (upholding the enactment of 1987 Or Laws Ch. 818, Sec. 3, codified at ORS 199.534, which affected a legislative annexation of certain territories); Mid-County Future Alternatives Comm'n v METRO Area LGBC, 304 Or 89, 742 P2d 47 (1987); State er rel. Anderson v Port of Tillamook 62 Or 332, 342, 124 P 637 (1912). More frequently, however, the decision to annex property is made at the local level. 2. Tyaes of Annexations Not Subject to Boundary Commission Review - ORS Chapter 222. In all parts of the state except Lane County, annexations of territory into a city are governed by ORS Chapter 222. Before delving into the specifics of chapter 222, two caveats are noted. First, since there are now approximately 30 jurisdictions that have voter-approval a provisions in their charter and/or city ordinances, annexation processes in those jurisdictions may i be unique based on these local requirements. See Section VII, infra. For. purposes of the following discussion, the possibility of the presence of voter-approval provisions is not considered. 41 Second, in discussing the various types of annexation processes below, it is important to keep in mind that these methods only relate to the political component of the annexation. Thus, the use of any of the various methods discussed below does not obviate the City from complying with any applicable state and local land use procedural laws. See Roloff v. City of Milton- Freewater, 27 Or LUBA 80 (1994). State statutes provide for eight different types of annexations. The first seven of the methods, set forth in ORS Ch 222, may be used in both city-initiated annexations, as well as by landowner-initiated annexation proposals. The remaining method, called Urban Service Provider Annexation, will typically be a city-initiated proposal. See ORS 195.205 et seq, and Section IV, infra. a. Annexation by vote. ORS 222.111(5). Because of the way ORS Ch 222 is organized and written, this annexation method is considered to be the "general" or "default" annexation process, with all other annexation methods being considered "exceptions" to this general method With this method, the governing body first makes a decision of whether the proposed annexation is in compliance with the comprehensive plan and land use regulations. If so, two separate elections are held: (1) a city-wide election, and (2) an election within the territory to be annexed. In this manner, the voters of the city and in the territory to be annexed are tasked with deciding whether the property should, as a policy matter, be included within the jurisdictional boundaries of that municipality. See generally, Couch v. Marvin, 67 Or 341, 136 P 6 (1913); Landess v. City of Cottage Grove, 64 Or 155, 129 P 537 (1913). The elections may be held simultaneously or within 12 months of one-another. ORS 222.111(6). As a practical matter, this method is almost never used. b. Annexation by vote (Public Hearin Option to Dispense with City-Wide Election) ORS 222.120(4)(a). The City Council may elect to dispense of the city-wide election i i required by ORS 222.111(5) by instead holding a public hearing satisfying the requirements of ORS 222.120(2)-(3). The local government may then conditionally approve the annexation, subject to receiving majority support by electors in the affected territory. 42 This annexation method may become increasingly useful in areas experiencing a drawdown in groundwater affecting the viability of existing domestic water supplies. Judicial review of decisions to annex territory under these provisions is to the court of appeals, not LUBA. West Side Sanitary Dist. v LCDC., 289 Or 393, 614 P2d 1141(1980). However, if the decision at issues goes beyond simply declaring and alleviating a health hazard, it will be deemed to be a land use decision. See City ojAshland v. Bear Creek Valley Sanitary Authority, 59 Or App 199, 650 P2d 975 (1982). A good summary of the Health Hazard Abatement Law is contained in the Attorney General's Opinion Request OP 6326, dated Oct 3, 1989. f. Urban Service Provider Annexations. ORS 195.205 to ORS 195.220; ORS 195.235. In 1993, the Oregon Legislature enacted 1993 Or Laws Chapter Ch 804, (Senate Bill 122), which is codified at ORS 195.205 -195.235. Senate Bill 122 provides cities with a new tool for annexing property as part of a city's comprehensive growth management system. This annexation method allows urban service providers to prepare a plan, which if adopted by the voters, governs subsequent annexations over the plan's planning horizon. The statute requires service provides to enter into intergovernmental agreements for the areas subject to the plan. Under the statute, a city that provides urban services may annex territory within a UGB by adopting an annexation plan for that area. ORS 195.205. Annexation plans adopted pursuant to this statute are required to comply with the city's comprehensive plan and must contain information regarding five criteria: ❖ The timing and sequence of annexation; ❖ Local standards of local service availability required as a pre-condition to annexation; - ❖ The planned schedule for providing urban services to the annexed territory; ❖ The effects on existing service providers; and, ❖ The long-term benefits of the annexation plan. ORS 195.220(1). Critically, all urban service providers in an area subject to an annexation plan must be parties to the agreement. ORS 195.205(2)(a). Also, there must be a separate agreement 46 between the city and county that addresses the fiscal impacts of the annexation. ORS 195.205(2)(6). A public hearing is required before the annexation plan is adopted. ORS 195.205(3). If the City Council decides to proceed with the plan, a public vote of the electors in the city/district and the electors in the territory to be annexed is required. ORS 195.205(5). Prior to submitting the plan for a vote, certain conditions must be met. ORS 195.205(2). The election must be handled according to the process set forth in ORS 195.210-215. Note that the statute allows for a combined election, and the annexation plan may be approved if "a majority of all the votes cast in the territory and the city favor the annexation plan." ORS 195.215. It is unclear whether this requires a majority in both the city and the territory to succeed, or whether a simple combined majority is required. If the statute can be interpreted as requiring only a combined simple majority, then the vote of the city can dilute the votes of the voters in the territory. The City of Bend is one of the first cities (if not the first city) to successfully adopt an annexation plan pursuant to this statute and have that plan enacted by the voters. A copy of Bend's annexation plan may be found at http://www.ci.bend.or.us/leadpages/Site inap.htm. M. Annexation Subject to Boundary Commission Review - ORS Chapter 199. 1. % Generally. In 1969, the legislature statutorily created three boundary commissions, one in the Portland Metropolitan area, one in the Salem Area (Marion-Polk counties) and one in the Eugene (Lane County) region. See 1969 Or Laws Ch 494, §4 (currently codified at ORS 199.425). However, the Marion-Polk County Boundary Commission was abolished in 1981, and the expansion of Metro's authority in the 1990's eventually sealed the fate of the Portland Metropolitan Area Local Govenunent Boundary Commission (Metro Area LGBC), which was finally disbanded by the Legislature in 1997. See 1981 Or Laws Chapter 265; 1997 Or Laws Chapter 516 (SB 947). With regard to the Mehra Area LGBC, some of its administrative, record keeping, and rulemaking functions of the Boundary Commission were absorbed by Metro, but 47 C '03 13:10 Martin E3ischoff "C 1 01 r Andrew H. Stamp astamp @-rnar0nbischoff.com Practice Emphasis Mr. Stamp joined the firm in 2001, and focuses his practice on all aspects of land use planning and real estate development law. In addition to having a broad knowledge of zoning and planning issues, he has particular expertise In areas related to: . Transportation Planning Law . Access Permitting . Systems Development Charges and Impact Fees . Annexations UGB Amendments . Wetlands Law . Storm Drainage/Storm Water Management . Writ of Review and Mandamus Litigation Procedure Private Property Rights and Takings Law . Metro Regional Government Planning Issues . Endangered Species Act Compliance • Appellate and LUBA Practice Education Mr. Stamp received his Batchelor of Science degree in Geology, with departmental honors, from Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana in 1989. He received his JD, cum laude, in May of 1997 from Northwestern School of Law of Lewis & Clark College. While attending Lewis & Clark, he also earned a Certificate in Environmental & Natural Resources Law. Prior to attending law school, Mr. Stamp served 5 years as an officer in the United States Army. During Law School, he interned at the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). Professional Activities 1JEC: bl '103 1.3: 110 ' Martin Bischoff' i•as:c UI Mr. Stamp is the co-chair of the Education Committee of the Real Estate & Land Use Section of the Oregon State Bar and is a member of the Government Law Section of the Oregon State Bar. He also served as a member of ODOTs Access Management Advisory Committee (AMAC 11) and currently serves on Metrds Water Resources Policy Advisory Committee (WRPAC). He occasionally contributes to Real Estate & Land Use Section's bi-monthly Real Estate & Land Use Digest. Representative Cases Bigley v. City of Portland, 168 Or App 508, 4 P3d 741 (2000). Publications • Co-Author: Integrating Procedural Aspects of Transportation and Growth Management in Oregon: A Critical View of ODOTs Role as a Growth Management Agency, Or. L. Rev., 1998 • Co-Author: Chapter 10, Oregon State Bar's Land Use Deskbook. • Co-Author: Chapter 8, Nichols on Eminent Domain. • Author: "The 120-Day Rule, Writ of Mandamus and LUBA Jurisdiction," NBI, Aug. 2002. • Author. "The Goal Five Administrative Rules (Division 23), Good Medicine for an Ailing Land Use Program?" NBI, Aug. 2002. Speaking Engagements • "Dispatches from the Frontline: Access Management in Oregon," presented at Law Seminar Group's Annual "Oregon Land Use" CLE, Dec. 2000. • "Case Law Update" and "Can't Get There From Here: A Survey of Section 060 of the Transportation Planning Rule," presented at Law Seminar Group's Annual "Oregon Land Use" CLE, Dec. 2001. • Land Use Law Update In Oregon, National Business Institute, Aug. 2002, • Oregon aw on Annexations, National Business Institute, Dec. 2002. J17J~L7y~741pC 1. C.Jb F'10.3 IJtI, t71 ' l7J tJ: 2L7 • Martin Bischoff Recent Awards . Northwest Examiner's 2001 Keeston Lowery Better Government Award suca 0 ®Copyright 1999-2003. All Rights Reserved. Martin, Bischoff, Templeton, Langslet & Hoffman LLP Phone: (503) 224-3113 Fax: (503) 224-9471 900 Pioneer Tower, 888 SW 5th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204 J RFc~~~ oFc FDOO r 11 12/10/03 'qan7,nistr ?~p3 City recorder (Bull Mt Annexation) City of Tigard Tigard OR 97223 Sirs, Madam: I wish to go on record as being opposed to the city of Tigard annexing Bull Mt. Oda Kaufmann 14025 Bull Mt Rd Tigard OR 97224 Ms. Oda Kaufmann I r -5 14025 SW Bull Mountain Rd R N~. Portland. OR 97224 ! L; U xx Attachment 3 RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP Attorneys At Law MEMORANDUM 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 (503) 222-4402 Fax: (503) 243-2944 TO: City Council, William Monahan, Jim Hendryx City of Tigard FROM: Timothy V. Ramis, Gary Firestone City Attorney's Office DATE: December 12, 2003 RE: Tigard/Bull Mountain At the December 2, 2003, City Council meeting on the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan, a question was asked whether the City Attorney's office had provided a legal analysis of the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan (BMAP). This memorandum describes the legal standards and discusses what the City Attorney's office has done to review the BMAP. • Le-Ral Standard Annexations by means of an annexation plan are governed by ORS 195.205 through 195.235. Nothing in those sections requires a legal review of the annexation plan. ORS 195.220(1) specifies that an annexation plan must include the following: (a) The timing and sequence of annexation; (b) Local standards of urban service availability required as a precondition of annexation; (c) The planned schedules for providing urban services to the territory; (d) The effects on existing urban service providers: (e) The long-term benefits of the annexation plan. The annexation plan included separate sections on each of these topics. ORS 195.220(2) requires consistency with applicable Comprehensive Plan policies. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan policies was addressed in the application narrative submitted with the land use application. Memorandum re: Tigard/Bu!! Mountain December 12, 2003 Page 2 Actions by the City Attorney's Office Staff consulted with the City Attorney's office throughout the process. The City Attorney's office provided both procedural and substantive advice throughout the process. The City Attorney's office reviewed numerous drafts of the Annexation Plan. The City Attorney's office prepared the application narrative, which addressed applicable standards, including ORS Chapter 195 and applicable Comprehensive Plan policies. The application narrative concluded that the Annexation Plan was consistent with all applicable standards. Based on our review and participation on the process, we have concluded that the annexation plan meets substantive standards and that the City has followed required procedures to date. GFF/ G:/munVrigard/Bmapmemo 121203 ^NZ Attachment 4 RAMIS CREW CORRIGAN & BACHRACH, LLP Attorneys At Law MEMORANDUM 1727 NW Hoyt Street Portland, Oregon 97209 (503) 2224402 Fax: (503) 243-2944 TO: City Council, William Monahan, Jim Hendryx City of Tigard FROM: Timothy V. Ramis, Gary Firestone City Attorney's Office DATE: December 12, 2003 RE: Urban Service Provider Annexation ISSUE Does the City of Tigard have the authority to annex territory by the annexation plan method provided by ORS 195.205 to 195.235? ANSWER Yes. Any city may annex under ORS 195.205. Even if there is a requirement that the city provide an urban service, the City does provide urban services. ANALYSIS ORS 195.205(l) provides in part: A city or district that provides an urban service may annex territory under ORS 195.02, 195.060 to 195.085, 195.145 to 195.235, 197.005, 197.319, 197.320, 197.335 and 223.304. An argument has been made that Tigard does not comply with this section because it does not provide an urban service. This argument fails for two reasons: (1) the language "that provides an urban service" applies only to districts, and (2) the City does provide urban services. M1 Memorandum re: Urban Service Provider Annexation December 12, 2003 Page 2 The phrase "that provides an urban service" could be read to apply only to "district" or to both "city" and "district." We believe that the language "that provides an urban service" applies only to "district." The interpretation of the language that makes most sense is that it was intended to exclude rural service districts from using the annexation process, not to exclude cities from using the process. However, even if "that provides an urban service" modifies "city," the City does provide urban services. The list of statutes referred to in ORS 195.205(1) includes ORS 195.065, which specifies that "urban services" includes, among other things, sanitary sewers, water, parks, and streets. The City provides each of these services. The City provides at least one urban service and therefore is an entity that may annex under ORS 195.205, even if "that provides an urban service" applies to 46city.11 GAmunATigard\urbservices 120803.wpd AGENDA ITEM # J FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Conduct a Public Hearing on a Proposed Ballot Measure for the March 9, 2004, Election Regarding the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan PREPARED BY: Cathy Wheatley DEPT HEAD OK "ZITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Shall the City Council approve the Ballot Measure for the March 9, 2004, election for voters to consider the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan'? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Conduct the public hearing on whether to forward the proposed ballot measure to voters on March 9, 2004 as set forth in the proposed resolution. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City Council may conduct a public hearing on the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan on December 16, 2003. If the Council approves the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan, then a second hearing will be conducted on the proposed ballot measure that would be forwarded to voters for their consideration of the Annexation Plan. The attached resolution, if approved, would direct the City Recorder and other staff to take the necessary steps to place the measure on the March 9, 2004, ballot for consideration by voters in the City of Tigard and voters in the area proposed for annexation. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 1. Deny the resolution. 2. Amend the resolution. 3. Delay consideration of the resolution. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Growth and Growth Management - Goal #2 - Urban services are provided to all citizens within Tigard's urban growth boundary and recipients of services pay their share. Strategy #1 - Adopt criteria that outlines when and under what circumstances areas on Bull Mountain will annex. ATTACHMENT LIST 1. Proposed Resolution Exhibit A - Map of the area proposed for annexation. Exhibit B - Explanatory statement to be submitted to Washington County for the Voter's Pamphlet FISCAL NOTES City of Tigard will need to pay for its proportionate share of the costs for this election, which will be determined by the number of measures filed by other jurisdictions in Washington County. i:\adm\packet 03\ballot title ais i 1 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON RESOLUTION NO. 03--i-L A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TIGARD SUBMITTING TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF TIGARD AND TO VOTERS IN THE AREA PROPOSED FOR ANNEXATION BY THE BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN A PROPOSAL TO ANNEX THE BULL MOUNTAIN AREA IN PHASES AS PROVIDED IN THE BULL MOUNTAIN ANNEXATION PLAN WHEREAS, a public hearing was held December 2 and 16, 2003, to receive public input on a proposed Bull Mountain Annexation Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan; and WHEREAS, the area proposed for annexation is within the Urban Growth Boundary of the City of Tigard; WHEREAS, after due consideration, the Tigard City Council decided to forward a proposed ballot measure to the voters. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that: SECTION 1: An election is hereby called in and for the City of Tigard and the area proposed for annexation in the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan for the purpose of submitting to the legal voters the following question: Shall the City of Tigard annex the Bull Mountain area in phases as provided in the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan? SECTION 2: Tuesday, March 9, 2004, is hereby designated as the date for holding the election for the purpose of voting on the measure as stated in the above paragraph. SECTION 3: The election will be conducted by the Washington County Elections Department. SECTION 4: The precincts for said election shall be and constitute all of the territory included within the corporate limits of the City of Tigard and within the area proposed for annexation in the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan as shown in the attached map (Exhibit A) SECTION 5: The ballot title to appear on the ballots shall be: CAPTION A measure expanding the Tigard City limits by phased annexation. RESOLUTION NO. 03 - Page 1 QUESTION Shall the City of Tigard annex the Bull Mountain area in phases as provided in the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan? SUMMARY Approval would annex territory to Tigard in phases: Phase 1 (East) - Effective July 1, 2004: Generally north of Beef Bend Road; east of Mountain Gate subdivision; south of existing City limits. Phase 2 (South) - Effective July 1, 2005: Generally west of the eastern edge of Mountain Gate subdivision, north of Beef Bend Road; east of SW 150th; south of Sunrise Lane and existing City Limits. Phase 3 (North/West) - Effective July 1, 2006: Generally south of Barrows, east of the western edge of Kerron's Crest subdivision, north of the southern edge of Meyer's Farm subdivision; east of City limits (existing plus Phase 2). Includes islands within existing City. Also including an area west of Meyer's Farm subdivision to line extended south from western edge of Kerron's Crest subdivision. SECTION 6: The Council adopts the Explanatory Statement for the measure that is attached to this Resolution (Exhibit B). SECTION 7: The City Recorder and other staff shall take all necessary steps to effectuate this resolution. SECTION 8: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage. PASSED: This day of 2003. Council President - City of Tigard ATTEST: City Recorder - City of Tigard RESOLUTION NO. 03 - Page 2 RON- f ~ w a ' X HT ever A LWEE ~ »EOEE `vv e' rim - . G`TA i, `4 GEO Ga 1c N,~•, a T 2 EYE. Y ~4~ NrOOlANT10N bv6 TEIE X0145 T ,.ENfi c , i MAP VICINITY BULL MTN. n Lu ~ f 'of TigaANNEXATION PLAN Ci IN S l~ M 1-JPLAN AREA bE S N aE _r U L MO N ` N A EW n "ET cT /O r cr c0 .r 1 Iy~ 4YLN.ET b i ~Lr d~ ~ t§ CT-~ Y O `>r ~Nw AST NENDY P 3 aa~' N c D n0 ~,td'~ i 0 TLA. T -10000 1500 moo 2500 fGG1 • [.T • .E 3 faoa ren YaTT n Lr OqF ~ „29N E E;MEE K Communi Cit}'ofTiga~ tY Development > ~ LhM~~~ °n fhlt mLp h to ornery °ohand . : quid 6e verified J77..... vycQmGy~M~cec DMLIOn, Plot date; Nov 24, N,a er d 2003; i:UrptnibethianneXation 'ul Y,OUd OR 07723 (503) 63&(171 1 Y 2003 Onto hnA"" 'Ava rtt. pdated calculations for 20041114 03.apr Exhibit B EXPLANATORY STATEMENT (500 Words) This measure, if a majority of all of the votes cast in the territory and the city favor the annexation plan, would annex the Bull Mountain area into Tigard in phases as provided in the Bull Mountain Annexation Plan. The area is within the Urban Growth Boundary. On annexation, the annexed area would be withdrawn from the Tigard Water Districts and police and street services would be provided by Tigard rather than the County. Annexation, if approved, would be in the following three phases: Phase 1 (East) - Effective July 1, 2004: Generally located north of Beef Bend Road; east of the Mountain Gate subdivision; south of Bull Mountain Road including parcels north of Bull Mountain Road; west of Aspen Ridge and Helm Heights subdivisions. Phase 2 (South) - Effective July 1, 2005: Generally located north of Beef Bend Road; east of SW 150`h; south of Sunrise Lane extended east to, and including, the High Tor subdivisions, south to Bull Mountain Road (including two parcels north of Bull Mountain Estates); and west of the Mountain Gate subdivision. Phase 3 (North/West) - Effective July 1, 2006: Generally bounded by Barrows on the north to Kerron's Crest subdivision, south to about 630 ft. west of Meyer's Farm subdivision; east to SW 150`h; north along SW 1501h to Sunrise Lane; east until just south of Pacific Crest subdivision; north along the east boundary of Hillshire Creek Estates; north to Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) easement to Barrows. Includes unincorporated Fern Street parcels. Annexation would result in a property tax increase of approximately 6% to 8.5% within the area to be annexed. For example for a property with an assessed value of $250,000 would experience a property tax increase of $282. Other charges may also increase. The annexation would create an increase in revenue to the City of Tigard, but the City would have higher operating costs. Increased revenue to the city includes additional state shared revenues, system development charges, traffic impact fees, franchise fees and property taxes. Annexation of the Bull Mountain area would not impact service levels for existing city residents. Newly annexed residents would receive: 1. A higher standard for police services. The City Council has traditionally authorized our staffing at 1.5 officers per 1,000 (currently it is 1.3 officers per 1,000), compared to the current 1 officer per 1,000 provided by the County in the Bull Mountain area. 2. Broader civic participation and voting power in the affairs of the City of Tigard. 3. A process to provide more traffic calming. ~t 0- 1 4. Road maintenance improvements including roadside mowing and more frequent maintenance on roads where jurisdiction is transferred from Washington County to the City of Tigard. 5. Park system planning, land acquisition and park development. 71 AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: December 16, 2003 PUBLIC HEARING (QUASI-] U DICIAL) TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: CONSIDER RIGHT-OF-WAY STREET VACATION FOR 74t" AVENUE AT LANDAU STREET VAC 2002-00001 c Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony L\ADWGREEMCITY COUNCIUCCSIGNUMPH TESTIMONY OJ ANNEXATION.DOC AGENDA ITEM No. 6 Date: December 16, 2003 PLEASE PRINT Proponent - S eakin In Favor Opponent - (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. o Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone N. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. i Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. 1 I I AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Vacation of a 3,241 square foot portion of public right-of-way commonly known as SW 74th Avenue (VAC2003-00001) PREPARED BY: Mathew Scheidegger DEPT HEAD OK tkOCITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the City Council vacate an approximately 3,241 square foot portion of public right-of-way commonly known as SW 74th Avenue? STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council vacate the requested 3,241 square foot portion of public right-of-way commonly known as SW 74th Avenue (Attachment 1). INFORMATION SUMMARY In the City vacation process there are two ways of initiating the vacation of streets, easements and other public dedicated areas. An applicant may file a vacation petition with the City Council (Attachment 2), which initiates a vacation by passing a Resolution to schedule a formal public hearing to consider such requests. The second option is for an applicant to file a petition with the Planning Commission requesting a vacation. This requires signatures of all abutting property owners and of the owners of two-thirds of the properties affected by the vacation. The Planning Commission then makes a recommendation to the City Council based on compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has asked the City Council to initiate vacation proceedings. The Council initiated the proceedings on October 28, 2003. Currently, the requested portion of 74th Avenue that has been requested to be vacated lies to the northwest of the SW 74th Avenue/Landau Street intersection. The reason for the vacation request is the Tigard Transportation System Plan indicates that SW 74th Avenue is to meet SW Landau Street at a 90 degree angle. To facilitate the realignment of SW 74th Avenue, the applicant has secured a 1,314 square foot right-of-way dedication agreement with the adjacent property owners to the east (Attachment 3). With the additional right-of-way needed to realign SW 74th Avenue, the requested 3,241 square feet of right-of-way is no longer necessary for street purposes. With the successful vacation of the requested right-of-way, the subject square footage would be incorporated into the proposed parcels of the recently approved Weigela Terrace Subdivision. The proposed lots of the subdivision do not need the square footage of the vacation application to meet minimum lot size standards of the underlying R-4.5 zoning district. There will be no negative effect on utilities. Currently there are overhead power lines, which will be placed underground with the proposed half street improvements. The City of Tualatin has a 36-inch water line within the right-of-way to be vacated that is not proposed for realignment. Tualatin Valley Water District also has a distribution line within the area requested to be vacated. Comments were received requesting an easement. The applicant has proposed to record easements for the water lines and utilities for future access and maintenance. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Take no action at this time. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Not applicable. ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment 1: Proposed Ordinance Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Plat Map Attachment 2: Letter Requesting Initiation of the Vacation Attachment 3: Right-of-way Dedication Agreement FISCAL NOTES There are no direct fiscal impacts as a result of this request as all fees have been paid by the applicant. i i i ATTACHMENT 2 Land Development Strategies, Inc. 26778 SW Colvin Lane Wilsonville, OR 97070 Office: (503) 682-1140 Fax: (503) 582-8870 August 27, 2003 City Council City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97225 RE: ROW Vacation, SW 74"' Avenue Dear Members of City Council: We have recently been notified that our request for a 10-lot Subdivision (Type II) adjacent to the northwest comer of SW 74 and SW Landau has been deemed complete. Prior to filing our application, a pre-application conference was held during which time Staff discussed and documented in the Pre-Application Conference Notes (See Page 8 of the City of Tigard Pre-Application Conference Notes located behind Tab 2) changes in the Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) for the above-referenced intersection. The TSP indicates an improvement to SW 74"' to Neighborhood Route standards and a realignment of SW 74th to intersect SW Landau at a right angle. See Figure 8-4 Proposed Neighborhood Routes, Chapter 8 City of Tigard Transportation System Plan (Located behind Tab 3). Applicant's engineer has met with Staff to establish the alignment of SW 74"' consistent with TSP. Staff has concurred with the proposed alignment. To facilitate the City's proposed request for realignment, Applicant approached the adjacent property owners regarding ROW dedication. Based on several discussions and pursuant to the attached Street Dedication and ROW Dedication Agreement (Located behind Tab 4), Applicant has secured a ROW Dedication on the City's behalf from the adjacent property owners, Dennis and Phyllis Ann Webster to facilitate the realignment. Applicant has the original notarized dedication ready for recording upon acceptance of the vacation request. Applicant believes that the anticipated Conditions of Approval for the above- referenced subdivision will require 1/2 street improvements to SW 74"' that are consistent with the realignment of SW 74"' Street co Neighborhood Route =NEW standards. Given this, 3241 Square Feet of land once required for SW 7,40 will no longer be necessary for ROW dedication. Applicant therefore requests the City of Tigard to vacate 3,241 square feet of land outside the ROW of the proposed newly realigned street. The plan and legal description is shown behind Tab 5. There are a number of reasons that vacating the right of way makes sense to the City of Tigard. These reasons are as follows: 1. The area ceases to act as ROW once the new curb, gutter and street is installed. 2. The new planting strip and sidewalk should be installed consistent with the street section of the remainder of the proposed subdivision. Given that, the area behind the sidewalk appears to be private property which is consistent with all other front yards in the City of Tigard. If the area was not vacated, the area of land behind the sidewalk becomes "No Man's Land". The adjacent property owner has no interest in maintaining or assuming responsibility since it is publicly owned. In that case pedestrians or bicycle traffic may continue to "cut the comer" as is the case now. In the least desirable situation, the public may use the area for parking, or as an unsafe play area. 3. If the City vacates the area, the City no longer has maintenance responsibilities. Instead the future lot that receives the benefit of the vacated area will incorporate the area into its front yard landscape and subsequent maintenance program. 4. Once the vacation becomes effective and the adjacent lots assume ownership of the vacated area and the 1h street improvements are complete, the newly realigned SW 74"' street take-on the looks of a desired Neighborhood Route. 5. Applicant has not relied on the vacated lot area to meet minimum lot size standards in the underlying zone. The average lot size is 7,504 feet WITHOUT the vacation. i We have forwarded the fee of $1,568 and respectfully request City Council to i recommend vacation proceedings based on the following findings pursuant to Chapter 15.08 of the City of Tigard Municipal Code located behind Tab 6. i i Sincerely, el Christy RE.IRQN RECORDED DOCUMENT TO: ATTACHMENT 3 Cf[Y HAIL RECORDS DEPARTACENT. C n T OP TWARD 13t2S SW Has Mvd. Titard, OR 17273 Fde No. DEDICATION DEED FOR ROAD OR STREET PURPOSES Spat. above - ved for Washingmn Canny R--fin mf- Dennis R.. and Phyllis Ann Webster do hereby dedicate to die public a perpcuw right-0f--way for street, road, and utility purposes on, over, across, under, along, and within the following described real property in Washinguru County, Oregon: Attar Exhibit "A" To have and to hold the above-described and dedicated rights unto the public forever for uses and purposes baeinabove stated. The grantors herebv covenant that thev are the owner in fee simple and the property it free of all liens and enaunbraoces, they have good and legal right to grant their right above-described, and they will pay all taxes and assessments due and owing on the property. The true consideration for this conveyance is SO_00. However, the actual consideration consists of or includes otter property or value given or promised which is the whole consideration. IN WRNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my band on this day of L 2003 d~6 , 4&9ZLIIZ~l 5 Gs►,v~~a,c, t773 Su/ ;V ~ 5 V 4.h ~q V S~ Tax statement Mailing Address Property Address STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss. County of Washington ) 1" '[iris instrument was acknowledged before me on 3 (dam) by 17614 iJ j S ~ J E ~ST~ 2 2 (tnme of person(s)). a OFFICLAL SEAL KARYN BAR8FR ads j vOTaHY tnISLIC-OREWN ! / c1 :41315 MyCommission apites to: VOID CIO (W slg W 23 13,S 2 ~Q~Cso13 ~ qJ~~~ ~ s c°u°cofpa~„~sllCA,mcy twfOcc We m byl. APGb., I. MY aay ~ of Tt _ city Fs9n b~f of ttse City cer as C D i J i wosioo HARRIS - McNONAGLE ASSOCIATES INC. ENGINEERS - SURVEYORS 12555 SW HALL BLVD. TIGARD OREGON, 97223 TEL. (303) 639-3453 FAX (503) 639-1232 August 25, 2003 LEGAL DESCRU TION FOR THE DEDICATION OF A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY BEING IRRIGULAR IN SHAPE BETWEEN S.W. LANDAU STREET AND S.W. 74~h AVENUE. THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LAND BEING COMPRISED OF PORTION OF THAT LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED TO DENNIS AND PHYLLIS WEBSTER RECORDED IN DEED DOCUMENT No. 2000-082799, ALSO BEING A PORTION OF LOT 29 OF THE DULY RECORDED PLAT OF "BOULEVARD HEIGHTS", SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 1-SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON. COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 25, THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SECTION 25, S 89° 19'19" E 292.31 FEET; THENCE AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SECTION LINE N 00°41'41" E 25.00 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY 25 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF S.W. LANDAU STREET AND POINT OF BEGINNING. THENCE ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE N 89018'19" W 72.85 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHEASTERLY CURVED 25 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF S.W. 74'' AVENUE; THENCE ALONG LAST SAID LINE ON THE ARC OF A 300.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20050'46" (THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS N 46°42'52" E 108.55 FEET) AN ARC DISTANCE OF 109.15 FEET; THENCE RADIAL TO SAID CURVE S 53°42'31" E 2.00 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A 158.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°47'59" (THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS S 25053129" W 57.04 FEET) AN ARC DISTANCE OF 57.36 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF AN 18.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO L THE LEFT HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 104°47'49" (THE CHORD OF WHICH BEARS r S 36°54'25' E 28.52 FEET) AN ARC DISTANCE OF 32.92 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING: 1,489 SQUARE FEET. a - - - - - IV LOT AM 3W 75th AVE I t rAx cor 4m TAX WA 1J1 W TAX MM ISi l9V -I---r---------~ - -i -------------T--------- Ift Ira Die 'ot .44 i y z I is 6 . ~ (/J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r I s g C4 I Icn a • ~ ~ ~ I ~ [ ~ to V J& W.L47-23 2W 1741rVH a( ~00' T tat o \ ,Ifl 0 00 ik I i AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE: Joint Water Commission Membership Agreement 11j PREPARED BY: Ed Weiser DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The City continues to make progress in its efforts to secure a long term water supply. The City has been offered a membership position on the Joint Water Commission. The attached agreement will grant the City of Tigard membership to the Joint Water Commission. Shalt the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Authorize the Mayor Pro Tern to enter into this agreement. INFORMATION SUMMARY The City has been actively pursuing ownership in a long term source of water. Past and current Council goals, as well as the visioning process, have consistently directed the City to this goal. To this end, staff has worked towards obtaining membership into the Joint Water Commission. Tigard has requested a membership that is based on the ability to obtain 4 million gallons of water per day from the Commission. The Joint Water Commission is willing to grant Tigard membership as outlined in the "Amendment to Water Service Agreement and Joinder Agreement" (i.e. leasing agreement, continued participation in future CIPs, Tualatin Basin Water Feasibility Study). Staff has presented this information to all members of the Intergovernmental Water Board. The City Councils of King City and Durham, along with the Board of the Tigard Water District have all passed motions endorsing the membership and recommending that the City Council of Tigard execute this agreement on their behalf. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Current Council Goals and the Visioning document identify the desire to obtain a long term water supply. ATTACHMENT LIST First Amendment to the Water Service Agreement andJoinder Agreement FISCAL NOTES N/A FIRST AMENDMENT TO WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT AND JOINDER AGREEMENT This First Amendment to Water Service Agreement and Joinder Agreement (First Amendment) is made this day of October, 2003, by and between the Joint Water Commission, consisting of the Cities of Hillsboro, Forest Grove, and Beaverton, and the Tualatin Valley Water District, a domestic water supply district organized pursuant to Chapter 264 (hereinafter "JWC") those parties individually (who also may be referred to as "Hillsboro," "Forest Grove," "Beaverton," and "TVWD") and the City of Tigard, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "Tigard"). RECITALS On or about , 2003, the individual members of JWC approved a Water Service Agreement, which replaced earlier agreements between these same parties creating the Joint Water Commission. The Water Service Agreement provides a comprehensive agreement in all aspects of the System as defined therein, including among other things, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, ownership and allocation of the System, including water rights, and mechanisms for governance and future capital improvements. The City of Tigard desires to become a member of the JWC and the JWC is willing to grant Tigard membership' All parties and Tigard wish to amend the Water Service Agreement, and being fully advised, now therefore the parties agree as follows: 1. Covenant of Tigard. In consideration of Tigard becoming a member of the JWC, Tigard agrees to be bound by all terms and conditions of the Water Service Agreement dated , 2003 and this first Amendment. 2. Acknowledgement of Tigard. By execution hereof, Tigard acknowledges that it has no stored water rights or surface water rights in the Tualatin River, Hagg Lake, or Barney Reservoir and that any water it obtains from JWC shall be through leases of water and use of System components as approved by the JWC according to the Water Service Agreement. 3. Capital Contributions and Future Capital Projects. The JWC, by and through its individual partners, and Tigard, are presently involved in preliminary feasibility analysis to expand stored raw water capacity or to obtain additional stored raw water in Hagg Lake. The parties recognize that such expansion and the amount of stored raw water that may be available as a result of these efforts is speculative and subject to numerous factors that may result in no additional raw water or a completed project yielding less stored raw water than anticipated. The parties agree that Tigard's Capital Contribution to the System will be for these improvements to obtain additional stored raw water and that Tigard's proportionate ownership in the System will be calculated based upon that Capital Contribution. Tigard acknowledges and agrees that if AMENDMENT TO WATERSERVICE-JOINDER AGREEMENT, Page 1 of 4 JAMCouncil Packets\2003\12-16-03VWC\1WC Membership AgreemcnWOC additional stored raw water is not obtained through these efforts then no water will ultimately be available to Tigard and Tigard will not be able to continue as a partner. In such event, Tigard agrees that it will voluntarily terminate and withdraw from the System as provided in the Water Service Agreement. 4. Governance. The parties agree that Tigard will have three representatives as set forth in Article III, Section 3.1 of the Water Service Agreement. The parties agree to modify Article III of the Water Service Agreement as follows: "3.1 The Commission. There is hereby continued pursuant to ORS 190 the Joint Water Commission-Hillsboro, Forest Grove, Beaverton, Tigard, and the Tualatin Valley Water District (the "Commission"). The members of the Commission shall be three (3) persons from each of the parties who are from time to time appointed by their respective bodies pursuant to the laws and regulations of the governing bodies. Members of the Commission shall serve at the pleasure of their respective appointing bodies. The name of the Commission shall be the "Joint Water Commission-Hillsboro, Forest Grove, Beaverton, Tigard, and the Tualatin Valley Water District.". . . "3.4 Meetings; Manner of Acting. Meetings of the Commission shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Oregon Public Meeting Law, ORS 192.610-192.710. The Commission shall hold meetings not less than quarterly. Such meeting may be cancelled by a vote of the Commission. Special meetings may be called by the Chairperson or by any Vice Chairperson. Seven (7) Eight 8 members of the Commission (including at least one (1) member appointed by each party) shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of the business of the Commission. An affirmative vote of a simple majority of the members of the Commission, provided that one (1) affirmative vote is received from each of the parties to this Agreement shall be necessary to decide any issue before this Commission, unless a different voting requirement for a specific action is specified or allowed in this Agreement." . "3.8 Management Committee. Each party shall appoint its Chief Executive Officer or their designee to serve on the Management Committee. If the Commission elects to hire its own employees for management the Commission, as provided for this in Section 3.7 of this Agreement, then the General Manager of the Commission shall also be a member of the Management Committee. The Management Committee shall meet as required to review the business operations of the Commission, such as planning, operations, etc., to make recommendations to the Commission General Manager." 5. Lease of Water by JWC. Until the projects referred to in Section 2 above regarding expansion or obtaining additional stored raw water are successfully completed, and at all times subject to the terms of the Water Service Agreement, JWC will lease water to Tigard upon mutually agreeable terms as to quantity and price. AMENDMENT TO WATERSERVICE-JOINDER AGREEMENT, Page 2 of 4 1APW\Council Packets\2003\12-16-03UVVC\JWC Membership Agrcement.DOC 6. The Parties agree that Article V, Section 5.3 of the Water Service Agreement shall be amended as follows: Section 5.3, Stored Raw Water. "Each party shall have available to it or obtain Capacity in Stored Raw Water, such that sufficient raw water is available at the Water Treatment Plant Facilities to serve the Demand of the Party. The Capacity requirement for Stored Raw Water shall consist of the water used by the Party for the period of May lst through October 31St. Such period maybe adjusted from time to time based on the legal and operational availability of Surface Water Rights. Stored Raw Water Capacity may be obtained by purchase of existing Stored Raw Water, expansion of Stored Raw Water and/or leasing of Stored Raw Water from another Party." 7. The Parties agree that Article VII, Sections 7.5 and 7.6 of the Water Service Agreement shall be amended as follows: Section 7.5, Excess Use Payments. "To the extent that a Party uses cNacity in the System in excess of its owned or leased capacity but such use does not exceed the threshold for over use as defined in Section 5.8 the Parties shall be required to compensate the Party or Parties for the excess capacity used. The determination of when the terms of this Section apRly and the price paid for use of Capacity will be determined by the Commission with the intent being that the Parties are treated equitably and fairly. If there is a lease in place the lease price shall apply to the excess. This provision shall not apply to those circumstances where the Commission offers additional water to a Party because of operational needs or considerations." Section 7.6, Effective Dates of Leases "The effective date for leases set forth in this Article 7 shall be on March 1, 2003 following the adoption of this Agreement and every March 1St thereafter." 8. Existing Agreement. In all respects, and except as specifically modified by this First Amendment, all terms and conditions of the Water Service Agreement are in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment as of the date opposite their signatures. SIGNATURES (on following pages) AMENDMENT TO WATERSERVICE-JOINDER AGREEMENT, Page 3 of 4 LTVACouncil Packets\2003\12-16-03VWCVWC Membership Agrcement.DOC CITY OF HILLSBORO, acting by and CITY OF BEAVERTON through its Utilities Commission Mayor Chairman Dated Dated City Recorder City Recorder City Attorney City Attorney TUALATIN VALLEY WATER DISTRICT CITY OF HILLSBORO President Mayor Dated Dated Secretary City Recorder Dated City Attorney CITY OF FOREST GROVE District Counsel Dated Mayor CITY OF TIGARD Dated Mayor Attest City Recorder Dated Dated City Recorder City Attorney City Attorney AMENDMENT TO WATERSERVICE-JOINDER AGREEMENT, Page 4 of 4 IAPW\Council Packe1s\2003\12-16-03UWCUWC Membership Agreement.DOC o AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 12/16/03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Ci /TriMet Memorandum of Understanding PREPARED BY: Duane Roberts DEPT HEAD OK WTYMGROK_ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should Council approve the proposed City/TriMet Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for improving local transit services? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approve the proposed MOU as written. INFORMATION SUMMARY At workshop meetings held in October and November of this year, Council discussed with TriMet representatives, including agency General Manager Fred Hansen, a proposed MOU that lays out a collaborative approach to enhancing transit access in Tigard. As pointed out by the agency representatives, Tigard is the first local area selected by TriMet as a target for focused service and capital investments as part of the agency's 2002-07 Transit Investment Plan. The MOU is a framework for City/TriMet collaboration. The transit agency and the City agree to work together through the MOU to solve local transit issues. Key strategies contained in the Tigard Transportation system Plan and Local Service Transit Action Plan are incorporated into the MOU. The MOU commits TriMet to address, with City guidance, fixed route transit needs, capital improvement needs, and marketing and safety. The MOU also includes a commitment to provide regular progress reports to Council. The timeline for implementing the service and capital improvements coincides with the 2006 opening of Commuter Rail. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED i No alternatives considered. i ! VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY i i Transportation and Traffic Goal 0, "Alternative modes of transportation are available and use is manimized." ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment #1: Memorandum of Understanding. Attachment #2: Tigard Local Area Plan. FISCAL NOTES The agreement does not involve the obligation of City funds. Implementation of proposed capital improvements will depend on funding availability as part of each organization's annual budget process. i/citywide/triMet.MOU i i i i Attachment 2 DRAFT #4• Tigard Local Area Plan 9/17/03 Introduction This plan responds to Tigard City Council concerns regarding Local TriMet service and. executes the Tigard Local Area Plan of TrNet's Transit Investment Plan. It coordinates transit service with capital improvements and builds on the addition of Commuter Rail to gain noticeable enhancements to the total transit system. Goals o Improve access to transit o Maximize transit ridership o Improve local coverage Guiding Principles o Improve transit options for current and potential riders o Connect neighboring cities o Coordinate public/private investments to improve transit riding experience o Incorporate Tigard TSP Key Strategy Priorities: 1. Commuter Rail (the Local Area Plan will look at connecting commuter rail to the community with bus service, pedestrians and bikes) 2. (tie) Provide more frequent service, more hours of day 2. (tie) Express routes to regional employment centers 2. (tie) Transit amenities (bus shelters, real time information, etc.) 5. (tie) Provide access to employment areas 5. (tie) Provide more local transit service 7. Provide access to commercial areas 8. Provide park and ride lots 9. Provide access to activity and service centers Scope 1. Fixed-Route Analysis o Commuter rail connections (emphasis areas around Washington Square and Downtown) o Local Service Action Plan 2. Capital Improvements o Pedestrian connections for ADA accessibility and safety o Pedestrian and bike connections o Customer amenities such as shelters and waiting areas I Tigard Local Area Drafi Work Plait TriMet, October 14, 2003 3. * Customer Information o Signage to transit and major destinations o Information at stops including maps and transit tracker 4. Elderly and Disabled o Connections to transit and to destinations o Travel Training S. Job Access o Low Income Housing Areas o Employer pass programs o Employer shuttles/vanpool shuttles o Employer site pedestrian access to transit 6. Community Outreach o On-Board o Bus stop postings o Neighborhood Meetings/Events o Business/Community Newsletters o Website o Comment Line o Fact sheets/Rider alerts/Press releases o Advertising o Cable TV o Employers/Tigard Area Chamber of Commerce Timeline/ Process Summer '03-Winter '03 o Develop work plan o Develop MOU o Review existing plans o Develop working group o Develop technical analysis o Working session with Tigard City Council Winter `031'04-Spring `04 o Define stakeholders o Listen to the Community o Define Alternatives o Define Markets o Identify long list of potential TriMet and City capital improvements 2 Tigard Local Area Draft Work Plan TriMet, October 14, 2003 Spring '04-Winter "04/'05 o Work with community/riders o Develop information for decision-making (analyze alternatives) o Narrow capital improvement list - define TriMet and City budgets for FY'06 o Tigard City Council update Winter'04/'95 - Spring "05 o Work with community o Narrow bus service alternatives o Prioritize capital list o Finalize projects to be included in FY'05/06 budgets Spring "05 - Summer "05 o Begin capital improvements o Present bus service proposals to community for commuter rail start-up, Spring '06 o Council Update Summer "05 - Fall '05 o Finalize bus service proposal and input to service plan o Continue capital improvements o Develop marketing/safety strategies Fall '05 - Spring '06 o Implement marketing strategies o Continue capital improvements Spring '06 - Summer'06 a Production of Final Report - Coordinate with other plans such as City's Capital Improvement Plan and TriMet's TIP o Presentation to Council o Implement bus changes o Begin Commuter Rail Operations Planning Area - Add Map i i i i 3 Tigard Local Area Draft Work Plan T -Wei, October 14, 2003 City Council Document Transmittal CITY OF TIGARD To: \,-i 411dywl OREGON From: -W Date: 0-- I'm sending you: Document Type: ❑ IGA ❑ Contract P~ Other 12 2 D G,(- Document Name: Approved at the Council Meeting of: /211,e Dom. Number'Copies Included: / Your document(s) have been signed by the Mayor ❑Your document(s) have been signed by the City Manager ' ❑Your document(s) requires an additional signature(s) When all signatures have been obtained, file an original document with City of Tigard Records ❑ Additional instructions: I:=MXCITY COUNCILICITY COUNCIL DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL.DOC h / A Attachment I MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Draft #2 - 9/17/03 Tigard Access Planning The City of Tigard and the Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon ("TriMet") are executing this Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), effective December 1, 2003. L Purpose This MOU establishes the rights and obligations of the parties entering into this MOU. II. Mission The Tigard Access Plan will provide a comprehensive process that will capitalize on the energy surrounding the commuter rail project to improve access, leverage public and private investments, and promote mobility options in the area. Development of commuter rail in the US Route 217 corridor ("Corridor") provides a unique opportunity for a partnership between Tigard and TriMet to improve access to and within Tigard. Ill. 7 Met OBLIGATIONS TriMet agrees to: a. Examine and implement changes to transit service that will improve access in the Tigard. b. Meet regularly with the City to coordinate projects related to the improving access in the Corridor. Types of projects would include: ■ Bus stop improvements ■ Transit preferential treatment for buses Pedestrian access improvements ■ Bike access improvements Public Information (maps, etc.) c. Involve community members in all phases of the Tigard Access Plan. Develop and implement a community outreach strategy that reaches the diversity of community and business members. d. Educated and market programs that will impro ve the public's ability to understand transportation choices. IV. CITY OF TIGARD OBLIGATIONS Tigard agrees to: a. Meet regularly with TriMet to coordinate capital improvements that would improve access to transit in the corridor. Types of projects would include those mentioned in section HI.b. b. Participate in the convnunity outreach efforts. V. DURATION This MOU is for an initial term through the opening of Commuter Rail. A final report will identify longer term projects. VI. TE,AMINATION TriMet or the city of Tigard may withdraw from this MOU, without penalty, by giving 90 days prior written notice to all signatories of their intention to do so. VII. GENERAL a. In connection with this MOU, each party is an independent contractor for all purposes and will have no authority to bind or commit the other. b. Nothing in this MOU shall create any legal right or inure to the benefit of any third party not a signatory of this MOU. VIII. NOTICES Any notices or communications under this MOU shall be provided to the individuals as designated below: TriMet City of Tigard Tony Mendoza Duane Roberts Any notices required to be given under this MOU shall be in writing and deemed effective if deposited in U.S. Mail Certified return receipt, hand delivered, or transmitted by facsimile with successful confirmation. TRI-COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION Fred Hansen Approved as to Form: General Manager District of Oregon (TriMet) Legal department signature date CITY OF TIGARD Mayor signatur date AGENDA ITEM No. 9 Date: December 16, 2003 PUBLIC HEADING TESTIMONY SIGN-UP SHEETS Please sign on the following page(s) if you wish to testify before City Council on: CONSIDER ACCEPTING THE 2003 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT AND APPROVING THE SPENDING OF FUNDS x Due to Time Constraints City Council May Impose A Time Limit on Testimony u r AGENDA ITEM No. 9 Date: December 16, 2003 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent - S eakin In Favor Opponent - (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. AGENDA ITEM No. 9 Date: December 16, 2003 PLEASE PRINT Pro onent- S eakin In Favor Opponent - (Speaking Against) Neutral Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. r Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. Name, Address & Phone No. 1 1 I I AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 12/16/03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Public Hearing - 2003 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant PREPARED BY: Dennis J. Dirren DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK 1 ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL The issue before the Council is to hold a public hearing regarding this grant, to then accept the grant and to approve the spending of the funds. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends accepting the grant and authorizing the spending of the funds. INFORMATION SUMMARY This is the eighth Department of Justice Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) the Police Department has received. The grant amount is for $17,893, which requires a 10% match of $1,988, bringing the total value of the grant to $19,881. The requirements of the grant are that the funds be spent to reduce crime and improve public safety. There are 7 program/purpose areas that the funds can be spent in. These funds will be spent in the categories titled, "Police Equipment" and "Police Training". The grant requires a citizen advisory committee made up of representatives from the local police, local prosecutor's office, local court system, local school district, and a community representative active in crime prevention. This committee has recommendation rights to the Police Department in regards to how the funds are spent. The recommendation before you is the one that is approved by this citizen advisory committee. These funds cannot be used to supplant any existing funds or pending purchases. Before the funds are spent by the City, the grantee is required to hold a public hearing regarding the proposed use of the funds, which is the purpose for the agenda item this evening. > The funds from this grant are going to be spent for the following items: i $10,500 - this money will be used to fund video equipment in the following 5 categories: 1. Video cameras for Patrol Supervisors (x2) 2. Video camera for Training Coordinator to record all training events as well to begin producing training videos for in-house as well as outside departments 3. Digital flat screen monitor to aid in evidentiary video editing and duplication 4. Updated video card for video processing computer 5. video surveillance equipment (digital wireless cameras for locations of reoccurring criminal activity) $6,000 - this will be used to purchase two additional AED (automatic external defibrillators) units to be used within the City. $3,381 - these funds will be used for the training of our School Resource Officers and the purchase of "bullying" curriculum to be taught in the schools. This brings the total expenditure from the grant to $19,881. Your approval of this will allow us to immediately draw down the funds from the federal government and then spend the money for the above listed items. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Public Safety Goal #1: "The community residents, business owners, and service providers understand their roles through effective communication to successfully enhance public safety and emergency services." ATTACHMENT LIST Attachment A = Communication Plan. FISCAL NOTES The matching funds of $1,988 are available in this fiscal year's police budget. Corresponding Budget Amendment is on agenda after public hearing is complete. i i ATTACHMENT A MEMORANDUM Tl ~ TIGARD POLICE DEPARTMENT n DATE: December 2, 2003 TO: Bill Monahan, City Manager FROM: Dennis Dirren, Police Training & Grant Coordinator SUBJECT: Communications Plan for the FY 2003 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant and proposed spending of said funds. The Communication Plan for the FY 2003 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant and the proposed spending of allocated funds includes the following actions: 1. Per grant requirements, a citizen advisory committee made up of representatives from the local police, local prosecutor's office, local court system, local school district and a community representative active in crime prevention must be held. This committee met on November 18, 2003 and approved the LLEBG and the proposed spending of funds. 2. Also required by the grant is a Public Hearing regarding the proposed use of funds. This hearing is scheduled for the December 16, 2003 City Council meeting and will allow the community to become aware of the grant, as well as supporting the use of funds. 3. The Tigard Police Department's Public Information Officer will issue a press release describing the awarded grant, as well as the proposed use of said grant funds. Cc: Chief Dickinson Liz Newton AGENDA ITEM # (0 FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET AMENDMENT #12 TO THE FY 2003- 04 BUDGET TO ACCEPT AND EXPEND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS PREPARED BY: Tom Imdieke DEPT HEAD OK CITY MGR OK~ ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the Council amend the FY 2003-04 Budget to accept a grant of $17,893 from the Department of Justice Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) program and increase appropriations in the Police Department by $19,881? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approve Budget Amendment # 12 INFORMATION SUMMARY The Department of Justice has approved a Local Law Enforcement Block Grant to improve all around public safety and provide police training and equipment in the amount of $17,893. A match requirement of $1,988 is required and a transfer from the General Fund Contingency is being proposed for the funding of the match requirement. A public hearing is being conducted at the December 16, 2003 Council meeting to explain the grant program and the proposed of the grant funds. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Do not accept grant. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Goal #1 The community residents, business owners, and service providers understand their roles through effective communication to successfully enhance public safety and emergency services. ATTACHMENT LIST Resolution, including Attachment A FISCAL NOTES The budget amendment will increase grant revenues in the General Fund by $17,893, transfer $1,988 from the General Fund Contingency, and it will increase appropriations in the Community Services Program (Police Department) by a total of $19,881. ~r AGENDA ITEM # I FOR AGENDA OF December 16.2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE An Ordinance Amending Chapter 11.08 of the Tigard Municipal Code to reduce the Number of False Reports Allowed from Burglary or Robbery Alarms Without Corrective Action and Penalty_ PREPARED BY: William M. Dickinson DEPT HEAD OK !'4' CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should the TMC Chapter 11.08 be amended as follows: Amend TMC 11.08.020.7 to correct the definition of "Dispatch center" to indicate it is a County agency rather than a City operation. Amend TMC 11.08.030 to delete the wording "The fee for a combination burglary-robbery user's permit shall be twenty-five dollars" because it is already stated in the TMC, "The fee shall be set by resolution of the City Council." Amend Section TMC 11.08.123.1 to change the wording to "If any alarm system produces two false alarms..." instead of "four false alarms." Change the words "calendar" year" to "permit year." Amend TMC 11.08.123.3 to change the wording to: "Upon any alarm system producing the third false alarm in a permit year, a fee per false alarm shall be charged to the alarm user. Subsequent false alarms shall be assessed an increasing fee that shall be set by resolution of the City Council." STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this ordinance. INFORMATION SUMMARY In order to reduce the number of times officers are called to respond to false alarms for businesses and residences that have burglary and/or robbery alarms, an increase in the penalty is being proposed. The proposal is to change from a fine after four false alarms, to a fine upon the third false alarm, with the amount of the fines assessed increasing for subsequent false alarms, as set by City County resolution. The purpose of increasing the penalty is to encourage alarm users to maintain and operate their systems properly with the goal of preventing the waste of officers' time. It is a better use of officers' time to respond to calls for service that are not false alarms. Several changes to language are proposed to update the information: (1) in Section 20.7, "Dispatch Center" is no longer a City facility; it is a County agency. (2) Reference to "calendar year" corrected to read "permit year" (3) In Section 30, entitled "Alarm Permits Required," the amount charged for a permit for a combination system is deleted, as this is stated in the City's fee schedule. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST A. Ordinance B. Copy of TMC 11.08 FISCAL NOTES This Ordinance will not cost the City any funds, and is intended to prevent the waste of Police Department resources. i i i i i ATTACHMENT B TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 11.08 BURGLARY AND ROBBERY repairing, altering, replacing, moving or installing ALARM SYSTEMS. any alarm system or causing to be sold, leased, maintained, serviced, repaired, altered, replaced, Sections: moved or installed any alarm system in or on any building, structure or facility. 11.08.010 Purpose And Scope. 11.08.020 Definitions. 2. "Alarm system" means any assembly of 11.08.030 Alarm User Permits Required. equipment, mechanical or electrical, arranged to 11.08.050 Senior Citizens' Exemption. signal the occurrence of an illegal entry or other 11.08.060 Fee For Failure To Obtain Or activity requiring urgent attention and to which Renew Permit. police are expected to respond. 11.08.080 Exemption For Governmental Political Unit. 3. "Alarm user" means the person, firm, 11.08.090 Emergency Notification partnership, association, corporation, company or Resources Person. organization of any kind in control of any 11.08.100 User Instructions. building, structure or facility in which an alarm 11.08.110 Automatic Dialing Device-- system is maintained. Certain Interconnections Prohibited. 4. "Automatic dialing device" means a 11.08.121 Response To Alarms. device which is connected to a telephone line and 11.08.123 Excessive False Alarms And is programmed to select a predetermined Fee Assessment. telephone number and transmit by voice message 11.08.124 No Response To Excessive or code signal an emergency message indicating a Alarms. need for emergency response. 11.08.125 Appeal Of False Alarm. 11.08.130 Confidentiality--Statistics. 5. "Burglary alarm system" means an 11.08.140 Allocation Of Revenues. alarm system signaling an entry or attempted 11.08.150 Enforcement And Penalties. entry into the area protected by the system, inclusive of silent and audible alarm systems. 11.08.010 Purpose And Scope. 6. "Coordinator" means the individual 1. The purpose of this chapter is to protect designated by the Chief of Police to manage and the emergency services of the City from misuse. enforce the provisions of this chapter. I 2. This chapter governs burglary and 7. "Dispatch center" is the C4t-y Comity robbery alarm systems, requires permits, facility used to receive emergency and general establishes fees, provides for revocation of information from the public. permits, and provides for punishment of violations. (Ord. 82-32 §2, 1982). 8. "False alarm" means an alarm signal eliciting a response by police when a situation 11.08.020 Definitions. requiring a response by the police does not in fact exist. It does not include an alarm signal caused 1. "Alarm business" means the business by by violent conditions or nature or other any individual, partnership, corporation, or other extraordinary circumstances not reasonably entity of selling, leasing, maintaining, servicing, subject to control by the alarm business operator 11-08-1 Code Update: 03102 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE or alarm user. 11.08.050 Senior Citizens' Exemption. 9. "Governmental political unit" means If a residential alarm user is over the age of any tax-supported public agency. sixty and/or is physically handicapped and is the primary resident of the residence and if no 10. "Interconnect" means to connect an business is conducted in the residence, a user's alarm system including an automatic dialing permit may be obtained from the Alarm device to a telephone line, either directly or Coordinator's office according to Section through a mechanical device that utilizes a 11.08.030 without the payment of a fee. (Ord. 01- telephone, for the purpose of using the telephone 21, Ord. 82-32 §4(c), 1982). line to transmit a message upon the activation of the alarm system. 11.08.060 Fee For Failure To Obtain Or Renew Permit. 11. "Primary trunk line" means a telephone line serving the dispatch center that is designated A fee will be charged in addition to the fee to receive emergency calls. provided in Section 11.08.030 to a user who fails to obtain a permit within sixty days after the 12. "Robbery alarm system" means an alarm effective date of the ordinance codified in this system signaling a robbery or attempted robbery. chapter or who is more than sixty days delinquent (Ord. 87-73 §2,1987; Ord. 82-32 §3, 1982). in renewing a permit. The fee shall be set by resolution of the City Council. (Ord. 02-05, Ord. 11.08.030 Alarm User Permits Required. 82-32 §4 (d), 1982). Every alarm user shall obtain an alarm user 11.08.080 Exemption For Governmental permit for each system from the Alarm Political Unit. Coordinator from the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter or prior to use An alarm user which is a governmental of an alarm system. Users of systems having both political unit shall be subject to this chapter but a robbery and burglary alarm capabilities shall permit shall be issued without payment of the fee obtain separate permits for each function. and shall not be subject to revocation or payment Application for a burglary, robbery, or of additional fees or the imposition of any penalty combination burglary-robbery alarm user's permit provided herein. (Ord. 82-32 §4(f), 1982). and a fee shall be filed with the Alarm Coordinator each year. The fee shall be set by 11.08.090 Emergency Notification resolution of the City Council. The R-e fir a Resources Person. be-twe, t), five dol;Rrs. Each permit shall bear the The alarm permittee shall provide the police f signature of the Chief of Police, and be for a one- department with a current updated emergency i year period. The permit shall be kept physically notification resources person at all times. (Ord. upon the premises using the alarm system, and 82-32 §4(g), 1982). i shall be available for inspection by the Chief of Police or his representative. (Ord. 02-05, Ord. 01- 11.08.100 User Instructions. i 21, Ord. 82-32 §4(a), 1982). 1. Every alarm business selling, leasing or furnishing to any user an alarm system which is 11-08-2 Code Update: 03102 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE installed on premises located in the City shall 11.08.121 Response To Alarms. furnish the user with instructions that provide information to enable the user to operate the alarm 1. Whenever an alarm is activated in the system properly and to obtain service for the City thereby requiring an emergency response to alarm system at any time. the location by the police department and the department does respond, the police personnel on 2. Standard form instructions shall be the scene of the activated alarm system shall submitted by every alarm business to the Chief of inspect the area protected by the system and shall Police within sixty days after the effective date of determine whether the emergency response was in the ordinance codified in this chapter. If he finds fact required as indicated by the alarm system or such instructions to be incomplete, unclear or whether the alarm signal was a false alarm. inadequate, he may require the alarm business to revise the instructions to comply with subsection 2. If the police department personnel at the 11.08.100.1 of this section and then to distribute scene of the activated alarm system determine the the revised instructions to its alarm users. (Ord. alarm to be false, said personnel shall make a 82-32 §5, 1982). report of the false alarm. 11.08.110 Automatic Dialing Device- 3. The Chief of Police or his designee shall Certain Interconnections have the right to inspect any alarm system on the Prohibited. premises to which response has been made, and he may cause an inspection of such system to be 1. It is unlawful for any person to program made at any reasonable time thereafter. (Ord. 87- an automatic dialing device to select a primary 73 §3(Exhibit A(part)), 1987). trunk line or any 911 prefix requiring a police response; and it is unlawful for an alarm user to 11.08.123 Excessive False Alarms And fail to disconnect or reprogram an automatic Fee Assessment. dialing device which is programmed to select a primary trunk line within twelve hours of receipt 1. If any alarm system produces four m of written notice from the Tigard City Police false alarms in any calerida+ permit year, the Chief Department that it is so programmed. of Police shall provide by certified mail written notice of the fact asking the alarm user to take 2. Within sixty days after the effective date corrective action in regard to false alarms and of the ordinance codified in this chapter, all informing the alarm user of the false alarm fee existing automatic dialing devices programmed to schedule. The fees shall be set by resolution of select a primary trunk line shall he reprogrammed the City Council. or disconnected. 2. Alarm users installing a new system or 3. It is unlawful for any person to program making substantial modifications to an existing an automatic dialing device to select any system shall be entitled to a grace period during telephone line assigned to the City; and it is which alarms generated by such system shall be unlawful for an alarm user to fail to disconnect or deemed nonfalse alarms. The grace period shall reprogram such device within twelve hours of cease thirty days after installation of or receipt of written notice from the Tigard police modification to an alarm system. department that an automatic dialing device is so programmed. (Ord. 82-32 §6,1982). 3. Upon any alarm system producing the 11-08-3 Code Update: 03102 1 mi TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE fifth aad si~etla third false alarm in a permit permit year there will be no police response to eajeiidai year, a fee per false alarm shall be subsequent alarms without reinstatement approval charged to the alarm user. Subsequent false of the alarm user by the Chief. The coordinator alarms shall be assessed an increasing fee that shall send a notice of suspension of police shall be set by resolution of the City Council. response to: All fees assessed must be paid to the City a. The dispatch center; Finance Division or a written appeal must be submitted to the Chief of Police within ten b. The Chief of Police; and working days of fee assessment. (Ord. 02-05, Ord. 01-21, Ord. 87-73 §3(Exhibit A(part)), c. The alarm user by certified mail. 1987). 3. The suspension of police response to an 11.08.124 No Response To Excessive alarm shall begin ten days after the date of Alarms. delivery of the notice of suspension of police response to the alarm user unless a written request 1. After the second false alarm the for hearing has been made as required in Section coordinator shall send a notification to the alarm 11.08.125. (Ord. 01-21, Ord. 93-13 §1, 1993). user by regular mail which will contain the following information: 11.08.125 Appeal Of False Alarm. a. That the second false alarm has 1. Any alarm user who has been notified of occurred; a false alarm or assessed a false alarm fee may appeal to the Chief of Police by giving written b. That if two more false alarms occur notice and posting a bond equal to the amount of within the permit year police officers will not the fee, if applicable, within three working days of respond to any subsequent alarms without the the invoice assessing such fee. Upon receipt of reinstatement of the alarm user by the Chief of the appeal notice and bond, if applicable, a time Police; certain shall be set for a hearing. C. That the reinstatement of the alarm 2. The appellant shall be given reasonable user can only be obtained by the alarm user notice of such hearing, failure of the appellant to furnishing written proof of efforts taken to correct appear at such hearing shall, if applicable, result the false alarms, a finding by the Chief that a in forfeiture of the appeal bond, and application of reasonable effort has been made to correct the said bond toward the false alarm fee assessed by false alarms, and payment of all fines assessed by the City. the City for false alarms; 3. The Chief of Police or his designee shall d. That the alarm user may appeal the serve as Hearings Officer. The burden of proof validity of a false alarm determination to the Chief shall be upon the appellant to show by a of Police by giving written notice and posting a preponderance of the evidence that the alarm bond equal to the amount of the fee, if applicable, signal in question was not a false alarm as defined within ten days, according to Section 11.08.125. in Section 11.08.020.8. 2. After the fourth false alarm within the 4. After receipt of all relevant evidence, 11-08-4 Code Update: 03102 TIGARD MUNICIPAL CODE the Hearings Officer shall, within three working penalty provided in subsection 11.08.150.1 of this days, render a decision. If the Hearings Officer section. (Ord. 82-32 §10, 1982). determines that the appellant has met the burden of proof, then the Hearings Officer shall order the appeal bond released to the appellant and rescind the false alarm determination. If the Hearings Officer determines that the appellant has not met the burden of proof, then the Hearings Officer shalt order the appeal bond be forfeited and applied toward the alarm fee as assessed by the City and enter such alarm as a false alarm. 5. All decisions made pursuant to this section are final. (Ord. 87-73 §3(Exhibit A(part)), 1987). 11.08.130 Confidentiality-Statistics. All information submitted in compliance with this chapter shall be held in the strictest confidence and shall be deemed a public record exempt from disclosure pursuant to state statute; and any violation of confidentiality shall be deemed a violation of this chapter. The police department shall be charged with the sole responsibility for the maintenance of all records of any kind whatsoever under this chapter.. (Ord. 01- 21, Ord. 82-32 §8, 1982). 11.08.140 Allocation Of Revenues. All fees, fines and forfeitures of bail collected pursuant to this chapter shall be general fund revenue of the City of Tigard. (Ord. 82-32 §9, 1982). 11.08.150 Enforcement And Penalties. 1. Violation of this chapter shall be punished upon conviction by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars. 2. The failure or omission to comply with any section of this chapter shall be deemed a violation and may be so prosecuted, subject to the 11-08-5 Code Update: 03102 AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF 12-16-03 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Amendment to Ordinance 10.36 Bicycles PREPARED BY: Michael Riensche DEPT HEAD OK Gy _ CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should TMC 10.36.010, 10.36.130 and 10.36.200 be changed to add an updated ordinance title, definition, applicability of traffic laws and violation-penalty covering electric personal assistive mobility device? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends amending certain sections of TMC 10.36 to cover electric personal assistive mobility devices. INFORMATION SUMMARY On January 1, 2004, Senate Bill 787 will become effective as state law. This new Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) relates to electric personal assistive mobility devices commonly known as a Segway Scooter. By adopting the ORS, it will help in updating Tigard Municipal Code (TMC) 10.36 to accommodate these new provisions, amendments and changes to the ORS. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED N/A VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY N/A ATTACHMENT LIST A. Ordinance B. Senate Bill 787 C. TMC 10.36 reflecting proposed changes FISCAL NOTES There is no fiscal impact. ATTACHMENT B 72nd OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2003 Regular Session Enrolled Senate Bid 787 Sponsored by Senator BROWN; Representative KROPP CHAPTER AN ACT Relating to electric motor vehicles; creating new provisions; and amending ORS 803.030, 803.305, 806.020, 807.020, 811.050, 811.440, 811.525, 814.470, 815.135, 815.2309 815.280, 816.310, 816.340 and 822.015. Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon; SECTION 1. Sections 2, 10, 11, 12 and 20 of this 2003 Act are added to and made a part of the Oregon Vehicle Code. SECTION 2. "Electric personal assistive mobility device" means a device that: (1) Is self-balancing on two nontandem wheels; (2) Is designed to transport one person in a standing position; (3) Has an electric propulsion system; and (4) Has a maximum speed of 15 miles per hour. SECTION 3. ORS 803.030 is amended to read: 803.030. This section establishes exemptions from the requirements under ORS 803.025 to obtain title issued by this state. The exemptions are subject to ORS 803.040. The exemptions are in addition to any exemptions under ORS 801.026. Vehicles exempted by this section from the requirements to be titled by this state are not prohibited from being titled by this state if titling is permitted under ORS 803.035. The exemptions are partial or complete as provided in the following: (1) Title from this state is not required for a vehicle unless the vehicle is operated on a highway in this state. (2) Title from this state is not required unless a vehicle is operated under a registration number of this state. (3) Manufactured structures are subject to ORS 803.025 as provided under ORS 820.500 and 820.530. (4) Snowmobiles, Class I all-terrain vehicles and Class III all-terrain vehicles are not subject to the requirements under ORS 803.025. The requirements and procedures for titling snowmobiles are as provided under ORS 821.060 and 821.070. (5) Road rollers, farm tractors and traction engines are exempt from the requirements for title. (6) Trolleys are exempt from the requirements for title. (7) Bicycles are exempt from the requirements for title. (8) United States Government owned and operated motor vehicles and trailers are exempt from the requirements for title. (9) Implements of husbandry, well drilling machinery, emergency fire apparatus providing public fire protection and invalid chairs are exempt from the requirements for title. Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 1 (10) Fixed load vehicles are exempt from the requirements for title while operated within the immediate construction project, as described in the governmental agency contract, in the con- struction or reconstruction of state or county roads, highways or city streets. (11) Motor vehicles designed to operate at a loaded weight over 8,000 pounds, trailers and equipment are exempt from requirements for title while: (a) Owned, leased, contracted or requisitioned by the State Forester, State Board of Forestry, their contractors under ORS chapter 477, or the federal government; and (b) Being used for the purposes of forest protection and fire suppression under ORS chapter 477 or a similar federal statute, including movement of the vehicles to and from the work area. (12) Farm trailers are exempt from requirements for title when the operation or movement of the vehicle upon the highways is incidental to its use in an agricultural operation. (13) Golf carts operated under an ordinance adopted under ORS 810.070 are exempt from re- quirements for title. (14) Golf carts or similar vehicles are exempt from requirements for title when: (a) They have not less than three wheels in contact with the ground; (b) They have an unloaded weight of less than 1,300 pounds; (c) They are designed to be and are operated at not more than 15 miles per hour; and (d) They are operated by disabled persons. (15) The nonresident owners of vehicles currently registered and titled in any other country, state or territory may operate such vehicles over the highways of this state without complying with the titling requirements under ORS 803.025. All of the following apply to this subsection: (a) This subsection only provides an exemption so long as the owner satisfactorily shows that the owner is not a resident of this state as described under ORS 803.200. (b) The exemption under this subsection applies to vehicles granted exemptions under ORS 802.500, 802.520 or 826.005, unless otherwise provided under paragraph (c) of this subsection. (c) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, a vehicle operated over the highways of this state for compensation or profit must comply with the titling requirements under ORS 803.025 in the same manner as required of nontitled vehicles. The following vehicles are not subject to this para- graph: (A) Vehicles operated under reciprocal registration exemptions established under ORS 802.500 or 826.005. (B) Vehicles operated under an exemption established under ORS 802.520. (C) Vehicles that are proportionally registered under an agreement established under ORS 826.007, and according to the procedures established under ORS 826.009 or 826.011. (D) Any vehicle if duly registered and titled under the laws of the state or country of which the owner is a bona fide resident to the extent that in the foreign country, state, territory or federal district where the owner resides like exemptions and privileges are granted vehicles duly registered and titled under the laws of this state and owned by residents of this state. (d) If no exemptions from titling requirements are in effect under ORS 802.500, 802.520, 826.005 or 826.007 with respect to another jurisdiction, any vehicle properly registered and titled in such other jurisdiction and for which evidence of compliance is supplied shall receive, when operated in this state, the same exemptions, benefits and privileges granted by such other jurisdictions to vehi- cles properly registered and titled in this state. Reciprocity extended under this paragraph shall apply to commercial vehicles only when engaged exclusively in interstate commerce. (e) Any vehicle operated under dealer registration plates issued by another state, country, province, territory or the District of Columbia is subject to this subsection. (16) Vehicle dealers issued certificates under ORS 822.020 may use and operate untitled vehicles as provided under ORS 822.040. (17) Towing businesses issued certificates under ORS 822.205 may tow untitled vehicles as pro- vided under ORS 822.210. (18) Vehicle transporters issued certificates under ORS 822.310 may transport untitled vehicles as provided in ORS 822.310. Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 2 (19) Untitled vehicles may be operated under trip permits described under ORS 803.600 or under permits described under ORS 803.610 to 803.625. (20) Vehicles that are registered by the United States Department of State and that are owned or operated by foreign nationals with diplomatic immunity are exempt from the requirements for title. (21)(a) Vehicles that are registered under the proportional registration provisions of ORS chap- ter 826 and are titled in a jurisdiction other than Oregon are exempt from the requirements for title. (b) A trailer that is registered under the proportional registration provisions of ORS chapter 826 and titled in a jurisdiction other than Oregon shall remain exempt from the requirements for title in Oregon if the trailer is registered when the other jurisdiction removes its exception to propor- tional registration requirements for the trailer. (22) Converter dollies and tow dollies are exempt from the requirements for title. (23) Electric personal assistive mobility devices are exempt from the requirements for title. SECTION 4. ORS 803.305 is amended to read: 803.305. This section establishes exemptions from the requirements under ORS 803.300. The ex- emptions under this section are in addition to any exemptions under ORS 801.026. Vehicles exempted by this section from the requirements to be registered by this state are not prohibited from being registered by this state if registration is permitted under ORS 803.310. The following are exempt, either partially or completely as described, from the registration requirements under ORS 803.300: (1) Road rollers, farm tractors, trolleys and traction engines are exempt from registration. (2) Bicycles are exempt from registration. (3) A vehicle is exempt from registration if it has registration issued for the vehicle by the Armed Forces of the United States where the registration is issued in a foreign country to a vehicle owned by a member of the Armed Forces. The exemption granted by this subsection applies only for a period of 45 days from the time the vehicle is returned to the United States. (4) A vehicle is exempt from registration if it is not operated on the highways of this state. No manufactured structure is exempt by this subsection. This subsection does not affect any exemption established under ORS 820.510. (5) A trailer is exempt from registration if it is equipped with pneumatic tires made of elastic material and is not operated in this state with a loaded weight of more than 1,800 pounds. No trailer for hire, travel trailer, camper or manufactured structure is exempt by this subsection. (6) Vehicles owned and operated by the United States Government are exempt from registration. (7) Snowmobiles are subject to the requirements for registration provided under ORS 821.080 to 821.110. (8) Manufactured structures are subject to ORS 803.300 as provided under ORS 820.500, 820.510 and 820.530. (9) Implements of husbandry, well drilling machinery, emergency fire apparatus providing public fire protection and invalid chairs are exempt from registration. (10) Farm tractors and farm trailers on highways are exempt from registration when the opera- tion of the vehicle upon the highway is incidental to its use in an agricultural operation. (11) Fixed load vehicles are exempt from registration while the vehicles are operated: (a) In the construction or reconstruction of state or county roads, highways or city streets; and (b) Within the immediate construction projects, as described in the governmental agency con- tract under which the work is being performed. (12) Motor vehicles designed to operate at a loaded weight over 8,000 pounds, trailers and equipment are exempt from registration while being used for the purposes of forest protection and fire suppression under ORS chapter 477 or a similar federal statute. The exemption under this sub- section applies to the vehicles or equipment described while being moved to or from the work area. The exemption under this subsection only applies to vehicles or equipment owned, leased, contracted for or requisitioned by the State Forester or State Board of Forestry, a contractor of the State Forester or State Board of Forestry under ORS chapter 477 or the United States Government. Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 3 (13) Vehicles being used for the purposes of forest protection and fire suppression are exempt if the vehicles are necessary in order to comply with ORS 477.615 or 477.650 or a similar federal statute. The exemption under this subsection also applies to the vehicles described being moved to or from the work area. (14) Golf cart exemptions from registration are as provided in ORS 820.210. (15) Vehicles currently registered and titled in any other country, state or territory are not re- quired to be registered by this state. All of the following apply to this subsection: (a) This subsection only provides an exemption as long as the owner of the vehicle satisfactorily shows that the owner is not a resident of this state as described under ORS 803.200. (b) The exemption under this subsection applies to vehicles granted exemptions under ORS 802,500, 802.520 or 826.005 unless otherwise provided for under paragraph (c) of this subsection. (c) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, a vehicle operated over the highways of this state for compensation or profit must comply with the registration requirements under ORS 803.300 in the same manner as vehicles owned by persons in this state. The following vehicles are not sub- ject to this paragraph: (A) Vehicles operated under reciprocal registration exemptions established under ORS 802.500 or 826.005. (B) Vehicles operated under an exemption established under ORS 802.520. (C) Vehicles that are proportionally registered under an agreement established under ORS 826.007 and according to the procedures established under ORS 826.009 and 826.011. (D) Any vehicle if duly registered and titled under the laws of the state or country of which the owner is a bona fide resident to the extent that in the foreign country, state, territory or federal district where the owner resides like exemptions and privileges are granted vehicles duly registered and titled under the laws of this state and owned by residents of this state. (d) If no exemption from registration requirements is in effect under ORS 802.500, 802.520, 826.005 or 826.007 with respect to another jurisdiction, any vehicle properly registered and titled in such other jurisdiction and for which evidence of compliance is supplied shall receive, when oper- ated in this state, the same exemptions, benefits and privileges granted by such other jurisdictions to vehicles properly registered and titled in this state. Reciprocity extended under this paragraph shall apply to commercial vehicles only when engaged exclusively in interstate commerce. (e) Any vehicle operated under dealer registration plates issued by another state, country, province, territory or the District of Columbia is subject to this subsection. (16) Vehicles operated or used by vehicle dealers may be operated or used without registration as provided under ORS 822.040. (17) Vehicles towed by towing businesses may be towed without registration as provided under ORS 822.210. (18) Vehicles without registration may be transported by vehicle transporters as provided under ORS 822.310. (19) Vehicles that are not registered may be operated under trip permits described under ORS 803.600 or under permits described under ORS 803.610 to 803.625. (20) If trailers that are part of a fleet of trailers for hire are properly registered in this state under an agreement entered into pursuant to ORS 802.500, all trailers that are identified as being a part of the same fleet and that are currently registered in any state, territory, province, country or the District of Columbia shall be permitted to operate in this state in both interstate and intra- state commerce without being registered by this state. (21) Vehicles that are registered by the United States Department of State and that are owned or operated by foreign nationals with diplomatic immunity are exempt from registration. ' (22) Tow dollies and converter dollies are exempt from registration. (23) Class I and Class III all-terrain vehicles are exempt from registration. (24) Motor assisted scooters are exempt from registration. (25) Electric personal assistive mobility devices are exempt from registration. SECTION 5. ORS 806.020 is amended to read: Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 4 806.020. This section provides exemptions from the necessity for compliance with or proof of compliance with financial responsibility requirements in accident reports under ORS 811.725, when applying for vehicle registration under ORS 803.370 or 803.460 and for operating a vehicle under ORS 806.010. The owner or operator of a vehicle is exempt, as provided by this section, from fi- nancial responsibility requirements if the vehicle involved in the accident, sought to be registered or operated is any of the following: (1) An antique motor vehicle issued permanent registration under ORS 805.010. (2) A farm trailer. (3) A farm tractor. (4) An implement of husbandry. (5) A motor vehicle of special interest that is maintained as a collector's item and used for ex- hibitions, parades, club activities and similar uses, but not used primarily for the transportation of persons or property. (6) A snowmobile, Class I or Class III all-terrain vehicle. (7) Any motor vehicle when the owner of the vehicle has submitted to the Department of Transportation a statement, in such form as may be required by the department, declaring that the vehicle is continuously not being operated on the highways of this state and explaining the reasons therefor. A person who falsely certifies under this subsection is subject to penalty under ORS 806.030. (8) A motor assisted scooter. (9) An electric personal assistive mobility device. SECTION 6. ORS 807.020 is amended to read: 807.020. A person who is granted a driving privilege by this section may exercise the driving privilege described without violation of the requirements under ORS 807.010. A grant of driving privileges to operate a motor vehicle under this section is subject to suspension and revocation the same as other driving privileges granted under the vehicle code. This section is in addition to any exemptions from the vehicle code under ORS 801.026. The following persons are granted the de- scribed driving privileges: (1) A person who is not a resident of this state may operate a motor vehicle without an Oregon license or driver permit if the person holds a current out-of-state license issued to the person by the person's home jurisdiction. To qualify under this subsection, the person must have the out-of-state license or driver permit in the person's possession. A person is not granted driving privileges under this subsection: (a) If the person is under the minimum age required to be eligible for driving privileges under ORS 807.060; (b) During a period of suspension or revocation by this state or any other jurisdiction of driving privileges or of the right to apply for a license or driver permit issued by this state or any other jurisdiction; or (c) That exceed the driving privileges granted to the person by the home jurisdiction of the person. (2) A person in the Armed Forces of the United States may operate a motor vehicle without an Oregon license or driver permit if the person: (a) Has a current out-of-state license or driver permit issued by the Armed Forces; and (b) Is operating an official motor vehicle in the course of the person's duties in the Armed Forces. (3) A person without a license or driver permit may operate a road roller or road machinery that is not required to be registered under the laws of this state. (4) A person without a license or driver permit may temporarily operate, draw, move or propel a farm tractor or implement of husbandry. (5) A person without a license or driver permit may operate a motor vehicle to demonstrate driving ability during the course of an examination administered under ORS 807.070 for the purpose Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 5 of qualifying for a license or driver permit. This subsection only applies when an authorized exam- iner is in a seat beside the driver of the motor vehicle. (6) Driving privileges for snowmobiles are exclusively as provided in ORS 821.150. (7) Driving privileges for Class I all-terrain vehicles are exclusively as provided in ORS 821.170. (8) Driving privileges for Class III all-terrain vehicles are exclusively as provided in ORS 821.172. (9) A person without a license or driver permit may operate a golf cart in accordance with an ordinance adopted under ORS 810.070. (10) The spouse of a member of the Armed Forces of the United States on active duty who is accompanying the member on assignment in this state may operate a motor vehicle if the spouse has a current out-of-state license or driver permit issued to the spouse by another state in the spouse's possession. (11) A person who is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States on active duty may operate a motor vehicle if the person has a current out-of-state license or driver permit in the per- son's possession that is issued to the person by the person's state of domicile or by the Armed Forces of the United States in a foreign country. Driving privileges described under this subsection that are granted by the Armed Forces apply only for a period of 45 days from the time the person returns to the United States. (12) A person who does not hold a motorcycle indorsement may operate a motorcycle if the person is: (a) Within an enclosed cab; or (b) Operating a vehicle designed to travel with three wheels in contact with the ground at speeds of less than 15 miles per hour. (13) A person may operate a bicycle that is not an electric assisted bicycle without any grant of driving privileges. (14) A person may operate an electric assisted bicycle without a driver license or driver permit if the person is 16 years of age or older. (15) A person may operate a motor assisted scooter without a driver license or driver permit if the person is 16 years of age or older. (16) A person who is not a resident of this state may operate a motor vehicle without an Oregon license or driver permit if the person is at least 15 years of age and has in the person's possession a current out-of-state equivalent of a Class C instruction driver permit issued to the person by the person's home jurisdiction. A person operating a motor vehicle under authority of this subsection has the same privileges and is subject to the same restrictions as a person operating under the au- thority of a Class C instruction driver permit issued as provided in ORS 807.280. (17) A person may operate an electric personal assistive mobility device without any grant of driving privileges if the person is 16 years of age or older. SECTION 7. ORS 811.050 is amended to read: 811.050. (1) A person commits the offense of failure of a motor vehicle operator to yield to a rider on a bicycle lane if the person is operating a motor vehicle and the person does not yield the right of way to a person operating a bicycle, electric assisted bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, moped, motor assisted scooter or motorized wheelchair upon a bicycle lane. (2) This section does not require a person operating a moped to yield the right of way to a bi- cycle or a motor assisted scooter if the moped is operated on a bicycle lane in the manner permitted under ORS 811.440. (3) The offense described in this section, failure of a motor vehicle operator to yield to a rider on a bicycle lane, is a Class B traffic violation. SECTION 8. ORS 811.440 is amended to read: 811.440. This section provides exemptions from the prohibitions under ORS 811.435 and 814.210 against operating motor vehicles on bicycle lanes and paths. The following vehicles are not subject to ORS 811.435 and 814.210 under the circumstances described: Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 6 a (1) A person may operate a moped on a bicycle lane that is immediately adjacent to the roadway only while the moped is being exclusively powered by human power. (2) A person may operate a motor vehicle upon a bicycle lane when: (a) Making a turn; (b) Entering or leaving an alley, private road or driveway; or (c) Required in the course of official duty. (3) An implement of husbandry may momentarily cross into a bicycle lane to permit other ve- hicles to overtake and pass the implement of husbandry. (4) A person may operate a motorized wheelchair on a bicycle lane or path. (5) A person may operate a motor assisted scooter on a bicycle lane or path. (6) A person may operate an electric personal assistive mobility device on a bicycle lane or path. SECTION 9. ORS 811.525 is amended to read: 811.525. This section establishes exemptions from ORS 811.515 and 811.520. The exemptions un- der this section are in addition to any exemptions under ORS 801.026. The exemptions established under this section are partial or complete as described in the following: (1) ORS 811.515 and 811.520 shall not be construed to prohibit the use of additional parts and accessories on any vehicle not inconsistent with the provisions of those sections. (2) Except for the provisions relating to exempt-vehicle safety lighting equipment, ORS 811.515 and 811.520 do not apply to any of the following: (a) Road machinery. (b) Road rollers. (c) Farm tractors, (d) Antique motor vehicles that are maintained as a collector's item and used for exhibitions, parades, club activities and similar uses, but not used primarily for the transportation of persons or property. (3) Whenever motor and other vehicles are operated in combination during the time that lights are required, any lighting equipment, except the taillight, which by reason of its location on a ve- hicle of the combination would be obscured by another vehicle of the combination, need not be lighted. This subsection shall not affect the requirement that lighted clearance lights be displayed on the front of the foremost vehicle required to have clearance lights nor the requirement that all lights on the rear of the rearmost vehicle of the combination be lighted. (4) Lighting equipment on bicycles shall be lighted as required under ORS 815.280. (5) Parked or stopped vehicles are not required to display parking lights if the road authority for the highway provides by ordinance or resolution that no lights need be displayed upon a vehicle parked on the highway in accordance with legal parking regulations where there is sufficient light to render clearly discernible any person or object within a distance of 500 feet from the highway. (6) Nothing under ORS 811.515 and 811.520 limits the ability to use the following lights with any other lights during the day or at night: (a) Public vehicle warning lights. (b) Pilot vehicle warning lights. (c) Tow vehicle warning lights. (d) Police lights. (e) Warning lights on vehicles at the scene of an actual or potential release of hazardous ma- terials, as described in ORS 816.280. (f) Warning lights on vehicles being used by medical examiners to reach the scene of an accident or of a death investigation, as described in ORS 816.280. (7) Requirements for use of motorcycle and moped headlights are under ORS 814.320. (8) Requirements for lighting equipment for an electric personal assistive mobility device are under section 10 of this 2003 Act. SECTION 10. (1) A person commits the offense of violation of electric personal assistive mobility device equipment requirements if the person: Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 7 (a) Operates an electric personal assistive mobility device during times of limited visi- bility conditions and the electric personal assistive mobility device or the operator is not equipped with and using the following: (A) A white light visible from a distance of at least 500 feet to the front and sides of the electric personal assistive mobility device; and (B) A red reflector, lighting device or material of such size or characteristic as to be visible from all distances up to 600 feet to the rear when the electric personal assistive mo- bility device is directly in front of lawful lower beams of headlights on a motor vehicle; or (b) Installs or uses any siren or whistle upon an electric personal assistive mobility de- vice. (2) Nothing in this section prohibits the use of additional parts and accessories not in- consistent with this section. (3) The offense described in this section, violation of electric personal assistive mobility device equipment requirements, is a Class D traffic violation. SECTION 11. (1) An electric personal assistive mobility device is not a motor vehicle for purposes of the Oregon Vehicle Code, except when specifically provided by statute. (2) A person operating an electric personal assistive mobility device on a bicycle lane, bicycle path or any part of a highway is subject to any provisions applicable to and has the same rights and duties as the driver of a bicycle when operating on a bicycle lane, bicycle path or any part of a highway, except when otherwise specifically provided by statute. (3) A person operating an electric personal assistive mobility device on a sidewalk is subject to any provisions applicable to and has the same rights and duties as a pedestrian on a sidewalk, except when otherwise specifically provided by statute. (4) Subject to the provisions 3f subsections (1) to (3) of this section, for purposes of the vehicle code: (a) An electric personal assistive mobility device is a vehicle; and (b) When the term "vehicle" is used the term shall be deemed to be applicable to electric personal assistive mobility devices, except those provisions that by their very nature can have no application to the devices. (5) The provisions of the vehicle code relating to the operation of an electric personal assistive mobility device do not relieve an operator or motorist from the duty to exercise due care. SECTION 12. (1) A person commits the offense of unsafe operation of an electric personal assistive mobility device if: (a) The person is operating an electric personal assistive mobility device on a highway that has a designated or posted speed limit greater than 35 miles per hour or that has no designated or posted speed limit, and the person is not in a bicycle lane or crossing the highway; (b) The person is operating an electric personal assistive mobility device on a bicycle lane, bicycle path or any part of a highway at a speed greater than 15 miles per hour; (c) The person is operating an electric personal assistive mobility device on a sidewalk in a careless manner that endangers or would be likely to endanger any person or property; (d) The person is operating an electric personal assistive mobility device on a bicycle lane, bicycle path, sidewalk or other premises open to the public and the person carries an- other person on the electric personal assistive mobility device; (e) The person is operating an electric personal assistive mobility device at a speed greater than an ordinary walk when approaching a crosswalk, approaching or entering a driveway or crossing a curb cut or pedestrian ramp and a motor vehicle is approaching the crosswalk, driveway, curb cut or pedestrian ramp; or (f) The person is operating an electric personal assistive mobility device on a sidewalk and does not give an audible warning before overtaking and passing a pedestrian and does not yield the right of way to all pedestrians on the sidewalk. Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 8 ~k~ (2) The offense described in this section, unsafe operation of an electric personal assistive mobility device, is a Class D traffic violation. SECTION 13. ORS 814.470 is amended to read: 814.470. (1) A person commits the offense of failure to use a bicycle seat if the person is oper- ating a bicycle and the person rides other than upon or astride a permanent and regular seat at- tached to the bicycle. (2) A person operating an electric personal assistive mobility device is not subject to this section. [(2A (3) The offense described in this section, failure to use bicycle seat, is a Class D traffic violation. NOTE: Section 14 was deleted by amendment. Subsequent sections were not renumbered. SECTION 15. ORS 815.135 is amended to read: 815.135. This section establishes exemptions from ORS 815.130. The exemptions under this sec- tion are in addition to any exemptions under ORS 801.026. The exemptions under this section are partial or complete as described in the following: (1) The following vehicles shall be deemed in compliance with the brake requirements if the vehicles are equipped with original manufacturer's equipment and accessories, or their equivalent, and maintained in safe operating condition: (a) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, motor vehicles of special interest that are registered under ORS 805.020. (b) Antique motor vehicles that are registered under ORS 805.010. (2) Motor vehicles of special interest that are registered under ORS 805.020 and that are street rods, as defined in ORS 801.513, shall be deemed in compliance with the brake requirements if the street rods conform to ORS 815.107. (3) The following vehicles are exempt from the brake requirements: (a) Road machinery. (b) Road rollers. (c) Farm tractors. (d) Electric personal assistive mobility devices. SECTION 16. ORS 815.230 is amended to read: 815.230. (1) A person commits the offense of violation of vehicle sound equipment requirements if the person drives or moves on any highway or owns and causes or knowingly permits to be driven on any highway any vehicle that violates any of the following equipment provisions: (a) A motor vehicle must be equipped with a horn in good working order, capable of emitting sounds audible under normal conditions from a distance of not less than 200 feet. (b) No vehicle shall be equipped with any bell, siren, compression or exhaust whistle. (2) This section is subject to the exemptions under this subsection in addition to any exemptions under ORS 801.026. The exemptions under this subsection are partial or complete as described in the following: (a) Authorized emergency vehicles are subject to sound equipment requirements and limitations as provided in ORS 820.370 and 820.380. (b) Vehicles of special interest that are registered under ORS 805.020 are not subject to this section if the vehicles are: (A) Equipped with original manufacturer's equipment and accessories, or their equivalent, and are maintained in safe operating condition; or (B) Street rods that conform to ORS 815.107. (c) Bicycles are subject to requirements and limitations on sound equipment as provided under ORS 815.280. (d) Antique vehicles are not subject to the requirements if the vehicles are maintained as col- lectors' items and used for exhibitions, parades, club activities and similar uses, but not used pri- marily for the transportation of persons or property. (e) The requirements do not apply to road machinery, road rollers and farm tractors. Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 9 (f) Electric personal assistive mobility devices are subject to requirements and limita- tions on sound equipment as provided under section 10 of this 2003 Act. (3) The offense described in this section, violation of vehicle sound equipment requirements, is a Class C traffic violation. SECTION 17. ORS 815.280 is amended to read: 815.280. (1) A person commits the offense of violation of bicycle equipment requirements if the person does any of the following: (a) Operates on any highway a bicycle in violation of the requirements of this section. (b) Is the parent or guardian of a minor child or ward and authorizes or knowingly permits the child or ward to operate a bicycle on any highway in violation of the requirements of this section. (2) A bicycle is operated in violation of the requirements of this section if any of the following requirements are violated: (a) A bicycle must be equipped with a brake that enables the operator to make the braked wheels skid on dry, level, clean pavement. (b) A person shall not install or use any siren or whistle upon a bicycle. (c) At the times described in the following, a bicycle or its rider must be equipped with lighting equipment that meets the described requirements: (A) The lighting equipment must be used during limited visibility conditions. (B) The lighting equipment must show a white light visible from a distance of at least 500 feet to the front of the bicycle. (C) The lighting equipment must have a red reflector or lighting device or material of such size or characteristic and so mounted as to be visible from all distances up to 600 feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful lower beams of headlights on a motor vehicle. (3) Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to prohibit the use of additional parts and accessories on any bicycle not inconsistent with this section. (4) This section does not apply to electric personal assistive mobility devices. Equipment requirements for electric personal assistive mobility devices are provided in section 10 of this 2003 Act. [(4)] (5) The offense described in this section, violation of bicycle equipment requirements, is a Class D traffic violation. SECTION 18. ORS 816.310 is amended to read: 816.310. This section establishes exemptions from ORS 816.040 to 816.300. The exemptions under this section are in addition to any exemptions under ORS 801.026. The exemptions established under this section are partial or complete as described in the following: (1) ORS 816.040 to 816.300 shall not be construed to prohibit the use of additional parts and accessories on any vehicle not inconsistent with the provisions of those sections. (2) Lighting equipment used on vehicles of special interest that are registered under ORS 805.020 shall be deemed in compliance with ORS 816.040 to 816.300 if the equipment is original manufacturers equipment and accessories, or their equivalent and if the equipment is maintained in safe operating condition. (3) ORS 816.040 to 816.300 do not apply to equipment on any of the following: (a) Road machinery. (b) Road rollers. (c) Farm tractors. (d) Antique motor vehicles that are maintained as a collector's item and used for exhibitions, parades, club activities and similar uses, but not used primarily for the transportation of persons or property. (e) Motorized wheelchairs when used as permitted under ORS 811.440. (4) On any combination of vehicles, only the lighting equipment on the rearmost vehicle in the combination of vehicles need be visible from distances specified under ORS 816.040 to 816.290 for lighting equipment on the rear of vehicles. Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 10 (5) Lighting equipment on bicycles shall meet the requirements established for such equipment under ORS 815.280. (6) Vehicle lighting equipment requirements for ambulances and emergency vehicles are estab- lished in ORS 820.350. (7) Lighting equipment on electric personal assistive mobility devices shall meet the re- quirements established in section 10 of this 2003 Act. SECTION 18. ORS 816.340 is amended to read: 816.340. This section establishes exemptions from ORS 816.320 and 816.330. The exemptions es- tablished under this section are in addition to any exemptions under ORS 801.026. The exemptions under this section are partial or complete as described in the following: (1) ORS 816.320 and 816.330 shall not be construed to prohibit the use of additional parts and accessories on any vehicle not inconsistent with the provisions of those sections. (2) Motor vehicles of special interest that are registered under ORS 805.020 shall be deemed in compliance with ORS 816.320 and 816.330 if. (a) The vehicles are equipped with original manufacturer's equipment and accessories, or their equivalent, and if the equipment is maintained in safe operating condition; or (b) The vehicles are street rods that conform ORS 815.107. (3) ORS 816.320 and 816.330 do not apply to any of the following vehicles: (a) Road machinery. (b) Road rollers. (c) Farm tractors, implements of husbandry and farm trailers. (d) Antique motor vehicles that are maintained as a collector's item and used for exhibitions, parades, club activities and similar uses, but not used primarily for the transportation of persons or property. (4) Motorcycles manufactured before 1973 are not required to be equipped with turn signals. (5) Truck tractors are not required to be equipped with rear reflectors. (6) Pole trailers are not required to be equipped with side reflectors, side marker lights, clear- ance lights or identification lights. (7) Motor vehicles registered in this state on or before January 1, 1940, are not required to be equipped with a high-beam indicator. (8) Bicycles shall be equipped with lighting equipment as required under ORS 815.280. (9) Requirements for warning lights on ambulances are provided under ORS 820.350 and 820.360. (10) Electric personal assistive mobility devices shall be equipped with lighting equipment as required under section 10 of this 2003 Act. SECTION 20. Local governments and state agencies having jurisdiction over public high- ways, sidewalks, alleys, bridges, trails, recreational roads and other ways of public passage may regulate by ordinance or rule and by traffic control device the time, place and manner of operation of electric personal assistive mobility devices, including prohibiting their use entirely. SECTION 21. ORS 822.015 is amended to read: 822.015. In addition to any exemptions from the vehicle code under ORS 801.026, ORS 822.005 does not apply to the following vehicles or persons: (1) Road rollers, farm tractors, farm trailers, trolleys, implements of husbandry, emergency ve- hicles, well-drilling machinery and boat or utility trailers with a gross weight of 1,800 pounds or less. (2) The owner of a vehicle as shown by the vehicle title issued by any jurisdiction if the person owned the vehicle primarily for personal, family or household purposes. If the person has sold, traded, displayed or offered for sale, trade or exchange more than five vehicles in one calendar year, the person shall have the burden of proving that the person owned the vehicles primarily for per- sonal, family or household purposes or for other purposes that the Department of Transportation, by rule, defines as constituting an exemption under this section. Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 11 (3) A receiver, trustee, personal representative or public officer while performing any official duties. (4) A real estate licensee representing a buyer or seller in a transaction involving a manufac- tured structure considered real property under ORS 308.875 or 820.510. (5) The lessor or security interest holder of a vehicle as shown by the vehicle title issued by any jurisdiction. (6) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a manufacturer who sells vehicles the manufacturer has manufactured in Oregon or manufactured structures that the manufacturer has manufactured anywhere. Nothing in this subsection prevents any manufacturer from obtaining a vehicle dealer certificate under ORS 822.020. This subsection does not exempt a manufacturer who sells or trades campers or travel trailers. (7) An insurance adjuster authorized to do business under ORS 744.505 or 744.515 who is dis- posing of vehicles for salvage. (8) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a person who sells or trades or offers to sell or trade a vehicle that has been used in the operation of the person's business. This subsection does not exempt a person who is in the business of selling, trading, displaying, rebuilding, renting or leasing vehicles from any requirement to obtain a certificate for dealing in those vehicles. (9) A person who is licensed as a vehicle dealer in another jurisdiction who is participating with other dealers in a display of vehicles, including but not limited to an auto show or a manufactured home show. This subsection applies only if the display is an event that lasts for 10 days or less and is an event for which the public is charged admission. (10) A person who receives no money, goods or services, either directly or indirectly, for dis- playing a vehicle or acting as an agent in the buying or selling of a vehicle. (11) A person who collects, purchases, acquires, trades or disposes of vehicles and vehicle parts for the person's own use in order to preserve, restore and maintain vehicles for the person's own use or for hobby or historical purposes. (12) Electric personal assistive mobility devices. Passed by Senate April 29, 2003 Received by Governor: M....... 2003 Approved: Secretary of Senate M.................. . 2003 President of Senate Passed by House May 19, 2003 Governor Filed in Office of Secretary of State: Speaker of House M.................................... . 2003 J Secretary of State Enrolled Senate Bill 787 (SB 787-A) Page 12 2003 Regular Legislative Session FISCAL ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION Prepared by the Oregon Legislative Fiscal Office MEASURE NUMBER: SB 787 STATUS: A-Engrossed SUBJECT: Defines electric personal assistive mobility device. Permits operation of devise on bicycle lanes and paths, sidewalks, and highways. Exempts devices from compliance with vehicle title, vehicle registration, financial responsibility, certain equipment and other requirements. Creates new offenses with maximum fines of $75. GOVERNMENT UNIT AFFECTED: State and local judicial and law enforcement departments, and the Oregon Department of Transportation PREPARED BY: Monica Brown REVIEWED BY: Susie Jordan DATE: April 21, 2003 2003-2005 2005-2007 EXPENDITURES: See Comments REVENUES: See Comments EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 2004 GOVERNOR'S BUDGET: This bill is not anticipated by the Governor's budget. LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANDATE: This bill does not affect local governments' service levels or shared revenues sufficient to trigger Section 15, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. COMMENTS: This bill would expand the offense of failure of a motor vehicle operator to yield to a rider on a bicycle lane to include yielding the right-of-way to persons operating an electric personal assistive mobility device. This offense is a Class B traffic violation with a maximum fine of $300. The bill also creates two new offenses related to personal assistive mobility devices: a) violation of equipment requirements, which establishes lighting requirements and prohibits installation of a siren or whistle; and b) unsafe operation if the device is operated on a road posted over 35 MPH and not in the bicycle lane or crossing the highway, exceeded 15 MPH, operated carelessly on a sidewalk, or operated with another person aboard. These new offenses are Class D traffic violations with maximum fines of $75. The revenue gained from fines for traffic citations depend upon enforcement of the offense as well as applicable fines. Actual amounts paid on individual citations cannot be readily determined as the amount is often less than the maximum fine allowed. Fines are distributed as directed in ORS 153.630. In brief, one half of fines paid on citations written into municipal or justice courts remain as part of that jurisdiction's funds. One half of fines and assessments paid on citations into municipal or justice courts written by state law enforcement officers are paid into the Criminal Fines and Assessment Account (CFAA). If a state officer writes a citation into a state circuit court all fines and assessments would be deposited into the CFAA and used as directed by the Legislative Assembly in agency budgets. As the provisions of the bill exempt these devices from compliance with vehicle title, vehicle registration, financial responsibility, driver license, vehicle lighting, and bicycle equipment requirements, the Department of Transportation anticipates this bill would have a minimal expenditure impact. SB 787 A-Enwossed Pace 1 of 1 April 21. 2003 72m OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY - 2003 Regular Session MEASURE: SB 787-A STAFF MEASURE SUMMARY CARRIER: Rep. Greenlick House Committee on Transportation REVENUE: No revenue impact FISCAL: Fiscal statement issued Action: Do Pass vote: 7-0-0 Yeas: Beyer, Dingfelder, Gilman, Greenlick, Wbrey, Zauner, Brown Nays: 0 Exc.: 0 Prepared By. Janet Adkins, Administrator Meeting Dates: 5-9 WHAT THE MEASURE DOES: Permits the operation of electric personal assistive mobility devices by persons sixteen years of age or older on bicycle lanes, bicycle paths, and sidewalks, and on highways with posted speeds of 35 miles per hour (mph) or less. Allows a local jurisdiction to regulate or prohibit use of the devices. Exempts the devices from compliance with vehicle title, vehicle registration, and liability insurance requirements. Exempts operators of the devices from driver license and helmet requirements. Specifies lighting equipment requirements. Creates the offense of unsafe operation of an electric personal assistive mobility device for: operating on a road that is posted over 35 mph and not in a bicycle lane; riding on a road or bike path over 15 mph; operating with another person aboard; operating carelessly on a sidewalk; failing to yield to a pedestrian; or failing to give an audible warring to a pedestrian when overtaking the pedestrian. Classifies the offense as a Class D traffic violation with a maximum fine of $75. Creates a separate offense for operating in violation of equipment requirements for the devices, also a Class D traffic violation. ISSUES DISCUSSED: • Whether local government approval should be an "opt-in" or an "opt-out" requirement • Comparisons with bicycle operation and laws • Pedestrian concerns • Potential uses of the device • Similar laws in other states EFFECTaOF COMMITTEE AMENDMENT: None. BACKGROUND: The electric personal assistive mobility device was introduced with the debut of the brand, Segway, in 2001. The devices transport a person in a standing position and have a sophisticated combination of sensors, gyroscopes, and computers to achieve a self-balancing function. Initially, the Segway was sold only for commercial uses, or to public bodies such as police departments and utilities. Last year a new version was introduced for the general public. Thirty-duce states and the District of Columbia have enacted laws permitting and regulating Segway-type vehicles. SB 787-A dies where, and under what conditions electric personal assistive mobility vehicles are permitted, and gives local governments the authority to prohibit or place additional restrictions on operation of the vehicles. The bill ! defines the device as a self-balancing, two-wheeled vehicle, designed to transport a standing person, with electric propulsion, and a maximum speed of 15 miles per hour. 5/13/2003 4:33 PM This summary has not beers adopted or o iciadiy endorsed by adion of the committee- Caisstlawd~rsreuFuns- MRorIrSouls 72m OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY - 2003 Regular Session MEASURE: SB 787-A STAFF MEASURE SUMMARY CARRIER: Rep. Greenlick House Committee on Transportation REVENUE: No revenue impact FISCAL: Fiscal statement issued Action: Do Pass Vote: 7-0-0 Yeas: Beyer, Dingfelder, Gilman, Greenlick, Mabrey, Zauner, Brown Nays: 0 Exc.: 0 Prepared By: Janet Adkins, Administrator Meeting Dates: 5-9 WHAT THE MEASURE DOES: Permits the operation of electric personal assistive mobility devices by persons sixteen years of age or older on bicycle lanes, bicycle paths, and sidewalks, and on highways with posted speeds of 35 miles per hour (mph) or less. Allows a local jurisdiction to regulate or prohibit use of the devices. Exempts the devices from compliance with vehicle title, vehicle registration, and liability insurance requirements. Exempts operators of the devices from driver license and helmet requirements. Specifies lighting equipment requirements. Creates the offense of unsafe operation of an electric personal assistive mobility device for: operating on a road that is posted over 35 mph and not in a bicycle lane; riding on a road or bike path over 15 mph; operating with another person aboard; operating carelessly on a sidewalk; failing to yield to a pedestrian; or failing to give an audible warning to a pedestrian when overtaking the pedestrian. Classifies the offense as a Class D traffic violation with a maximum fine of $75. Creates a separate offense for operating in violation of equipment requirements for the devices, also a Class D traffic violation. ISSUES DISCUSSED: • Whether local government approval should be an "opt-in" or an `opt-out" requirement • Comparisons with bicycle operation and laws • Pedestrian concerns • Potential uses of the device • Similar laws in other states EFFECT OF COMMITTEE AMENDMENT: None. BACKGROUND: The electric personal assistive mobility device was introduced with the debut of the brand, Segway, in 2001. The devices transport a person in a standing position and have a sophisticated combination of sensors, gyroscopes, and computers to achieve a self-balancing function. Initially, the Segway was sold only for commercial uses, or to public bodies such as police departments and utilities. Last year a new version was introduced for the general public. Thirty-three states and the District of Columbia have enacted laws permitting and regulating Segway-type vehicles. SB 787-A specifies where, and under what conditions, electric personal assistive mobility vehicles are permitted, and gives local governments the authority to prohibit or place additional restrictions on operation of the vehicles. The bill defines the device as a self-balancing, two-wheeled vehicle, designed to transport a standing person, with electric propulsion, and a maximum speed of 15 miles per hour. 5/13/2003 4:33 PM This sununa y has not been adopted or ojklaUy endorsed by adfon of the conunlt7te. Came ttra&"naFwn-2WUndwSwim Page 1 of 1 SB 767 By Senator BROWN; Representative KROPF - Relating to electric motor vehicles. 2-27(S) Introduction and first reading. Referred to President's desk 3-5 Referred to Transportation and Economic Development. 4-1 Public Hearing held. 4-17 Public Hearing and Work Session held. 4-23 Recommendation: Do pass with amendments. (Printed A-Eng) 4-24 Second Reading. 4-28 Carried over to 04-29 by unanimous consent. 4-29 Third Reading. Carried by Starr, B. Passed. Ayes, 26; Nays, 4-Beyer, Corcoran, Hannon, Schrader. 4-30(H) First reading. Referred to Speaker's desk. 5-1 Referred to Transportation. 5-9 Public Hearing and Work Session held. 5-14 Recommendation: Do pass. 5-15 Second reading. 5-16 Rules suspended. Carried over to May 19, 2003 Calendar. 5-19 Third reading. Carried by Greenlick. Passed. Ayes, 52; Nays, 3--Close, Smith P., Verger, Excused, 4--Butler, Garrard, Schaufier, Westlund; Excused for business of the House, 1-Speaker Minnis. 6-2(S) President Signed. 6-3(H) Speaker signed. 6-12(S) Governor Signed. 6-19 Chapter 341, 2003 Laws. Effective date, January 1, 2004. G i i I I I http://www.leg.state.or.us/03reWpubs/semmh.html 10/9/2003 AGENDA ITEM # ( 3 FOR AGENDA OF December 16, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUEIAGENDA TITLE Dedication of Property Greenwa Purposes PREPARED BY: A.P. DDuuenas DEPT HEAD OK 0-f QL~ ITC Y MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Should City Council accept the dedication of approximately 2.93 acres of property by Fanno Pointe, L.L.C. for use as open space or greenway? RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that City Council, by motion, accept the dedication of the property for the purposes described in the dedication documents and authorize the City Manager to sign the documents. INFORMATION SUMMARY The Fanno Pointe Condominium project has developed the developable portion of their property adjacent to Hall Boulevard and south of the new Library property. Approximately half (the rear half) of that property contains wetlands, the floodplain and a segment of Fanno Creek. The rear half of the property cannot be developed and is best preserved as open space or as a greenway. The Fanno Pointe developer is proposing to dedicate the undevelopable portion of the property to the City for greenway purposes. The proposed dedication offers the City an opportunity to preserve a relatively large piece of property for use as a greenway. The property has the potential to be further enhanced in the future for that purpose. In addition, the Fanno Creek trail system could be expanded further south through the property. The City's Parks staff has indicated that the proposed dedication would be welcome, but that the developer would have to conduct an initial spraying of noxious weeds prior to transfer of the property. The developer has agreed to that initial spraying and would conduct an additional spraying, if necessary. Attached is the letter from Polygon Northwest Company, the developer of the Fanno Pointe project committing to the spraying as requested. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMTIJEE STRATEGY The proposed dedication meets the Tigard Beyond Tomorrow Community Character and Quality of Life goal of Community Aesthetics, Strategy Balance development and aesthetic needs. ATTACI LENT LIST 1. Greenway Dedication Documents 2. Letter from Polygon Northwest Company dated November 14, 2003 FISCAL NOTES The dedication of the property for greenway purposes is at no cost to the City. twV,gLnk rl *WiU wr. MmWedic.wn d p~m" -1. P*" b.dW 6 e i 1 1 1 RETURN RECORDED DOCUMENT TO: CITY HALL RECORDS DEPARTMENT 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Corporation File No. 2002-00012 DEDICATION DEED (GREENWAY) FANNO POINTE, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company ("Grantor"), hereby grants to the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon ("Grantee"), its successors and assigns, for open space and/or greenway purposes that certain real property situated in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon, described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto (the "Property"). Grantor warrants that it is the owner in fee simple of the Property, and that the Property is free of liens and encumbrances except those of record on the date hereof. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AINW TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. The monetary consideration for this conveyance is $0.00. However, the actual consideration consists of or includes the value of the Property and other value given or promised, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged. (Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank) 1 11428015 Q - Fanno - Dedication Decd IN WITN ,SS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Dedication Deed on this day of / 12003. GRANTOR: FANNO POINTE, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company By: PNW CAPITAL, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company Its: Managing Member By: TOFINO, INC., a Washington corporation Its: Managing Member By: Print Name: Its: .r . STATE OF `GRE t ) i ) ss. County of his Dedication Deed was executed be re me on 2003, by of Tofino, Inc., a Was mgton corporation, the managing member of PNW Capital, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company, the managing member of Fanno P ente, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company, on behalf of said company. MARGARF"1' L. GOSSGLIN 9 NOTARI' PUBLIC S'I'nrF. Or WASHING FON COMMISSION 1NPIR:S Notary Pub c for Ore g JANUARY I;. 2006 My Commission Expires: AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY the City of Tigard on this day of , 2003. By: Print Name: Its: 2 #428015 v2 - Fames - Dedication peed Exhibit A Legal Description APRIL 23, 2003 LEGAL DESCRIPTION GREENWAY DEDICATION A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 2, "EDGEWOOD" IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE ALONG TEE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 2, NORTH 87° 40' 08" WEST, 376.01 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE, NORTH 16° 46' 32" WEST, 88.02 FEET; THENCE NORTH 13° 13' 37" EAST, 52.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 16° 46' 32" WEST, 48.66 FEET; THENCE NORTH 13° 13' 37" EAST, 63.62 FEET; THENCE NORTH 330 04'26" WEST, 73.82 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION TO TEE CITY OF T IGARD PER DEED DOCUMENT NO.,4003073770 ; THENCE ALONG 'SAID SOUTH LINE, ON THE ARC OF A 510.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, BEING NON-TANGENT TO PREVIOUS CURVE AND CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60 18'20", 56.13 FEET (CHORD BEARS NORTH 74° 04'40" EAST, 56.10 FEET); THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF TIM PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 976, PAGE 360, SOUTH 87° 39' 27" EAST, 160.91 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 77° 09' 30" EAST, 54.56 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87° 39' 27' EAST, 176.72 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTH LINE, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, SOUTH 02° 52' 01" WEST, 310.52 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 127,742 SQUARE FEET, OR 2.93 ACRES. TEE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS DESCRIPTION IS SURVEY NO. 29,167, WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVP:Y RECORDS. i i i i new r Exhibit B Depiction of Property 8'20' L1=061 R=510.00 L=56.13' CB=N74'04'40"E, LOT 1 N.E. CORNER LOT 2. 56.10' S 87'39'27' E_S 77-09 ~EDGEWOOD'\ BOOK 141 _~PAGE 509 S a?'39.2~' E sse.s8'____^ 160.91' 54.S30 " ES 87'39'27" E I 176.72 IN~ >Z~PROPOSED 8' - - 1 ° WIDE P.U.E. d~ SEWER EASEMENT TO UNIMED SEWERAGE - - - - ° AGENCY PER RECORDER'S FEE NQ " _ I 94057E97 s loco r) Lzj U-) z' CP a, 50) to rn p ^o C*q w Z J_ Z d: O CJ G T LINE .NNs POINT OF BEGINNIN LO T 2 S.E. CORNER LOT 2. 'EDGEWOOD' N 87'40'08 W 376.01' ` LOT 3 DEED DOCUMENT \L0OUT2 LINE NO. 94114886 SCALE: 1"=80' SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND i LOCATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 2, "EDGEWOOD" IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE- 3 QUARTER OF SEC110N 1 AND THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON DRAWN BY: F?Lm DAM -/,,.,Dl REVIEWED By. MRC DA7F-4/2'/03 9-... j PROXCT NO.: 328-011 A~ C- ]Nr- SCAT 1" - 40' ri.Mmia..nbVZLQVX= XCKZ=_ spa l MAv- Or= W '~o aVIF az as vrw POLYGON /W NORTHWEST COMPANY November 14, 2003 Daniel Plaza City of Tigard 13125 SW Hall Blvd Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Fanno Pointe Land Transfer Dear Dan, "In order to facilitate the transfer of the park land at Fanno Pointe to the City of Tigard, Polygon Northwest is committed to an initial spraying of noxious weeds in the Spring of 2004, and one additional spraying in the Spring of 2005 if determined necessary by the City's Parks Supervisor. These sprayings would be for the elimination of various stands of giant hogweed, Japanese knotweed and purple loose strife." If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. :gar , Duane Wilson Superintendent Cc: Fred Gast 109 East 13th Street, Vancouver, Washington 98660 (360) 695-7700 • (503) 221-1920 • Fax (360) 693-4442 www.Polygonhomes.com CCB#102912 City Council Document Transmittal 1~ L" ArIm2mgm CITY OF TIGARD To: .17iGLrt2 JJd ~~GS OREGON From: Date: 2 - 23 -,OZ I'm sending you: Document Type: ❑ IGA ❑ Contract 0 Other Ded[ca Div J, eA- Document Name: Fan no t Oln tL- LAG A.- o o ~v Approved at the Council Meeting of: Number Copies Included: ©rl ❑Your document(s) have been signed by the Mayor A' our document(s) have been signed by the City Manager i ❑ Your document(s) requires an additional signature(s) When all signatures have been obtained, file an original document with City of Tigard Records ❑ Additional instructions: IAADMICITY COUNCIL%CITY COUNCIL DOCUMENT TRANSMITTALDOC FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY OF OREGON LAND DEVELOPMENT LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL November 11, 2003 Tigard, City of Attn: Vannie Nquyen 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 RE: Fanno Pointe Condo dedication deed Please find enclosed: Final deed for City Signature and recording. Thank you Gov 373 77 v Transmitted from: James Christmas ichristmas(a~fnfcom Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon 401 SW 4th Avenue, 2"d Floor Portland, OR 97204 Telephone 503.796-6605 Mobile: 503.997.9915 Fax 503.796.6631 RETURN RECORDED DOCUMENT TO: CITY HALL RECORDS DEPARTMENT 13125 SW Hall Blvd. Tigard, OR 97223 Corporation File No. 2002-00012 DEDICATION DEED (GREENWAY) FANNO POINTE, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company ("Grantor"), hereby grants to the CITY OF TIGARD, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon ("Grantee"), its successors and assigns, for open space and/or greenway purposes that certain real property situated in the City of Tigard, County of Washington, State of Oregon, described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto (the "Property"). Grantor warrants that it is the owner in fee simple of the Property, and that the Property is free of liens and encumbrances except those of record on the date hereof. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. The monetary consideration for this conveyance is $0.00. However, the actual consideration consists of or includes the value of the Property and other value given or promised, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged. (Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank) 1 #428015 v2 - Fanno - Dedication Deed IN WITN ESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Dedication Deed on this day of / 12003. GRANTOR: FANNO POINTE, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company By: PNW CAPITAL, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company Its: Managing Member By: TOFINO, INC., a Washington corporation Its: Managing Member By: Print Name: Its: STATE OF `OREG ) ) SS. County of his Dedication Deed was executed be re me on /eq-4it 6.1-5 , 2003, by ` o _ c- of Tofno, Inc., a Was>ngton corporation, the managing member of PNW Capital, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company, the managing member of Fanno P 'nte, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company, on behalf of said company. MARGARET' L. GOSSELIN NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF WASHINGTON COMMISSION E=XPIRES Notary Pub 'c for Oreg JANUARY 17. 2006 My Commission Expires: /-/7-o G AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY the City of Tigard on this /11/4 day of ~(leec~n ~,e a , 2003. B~ Print Name:/ 2q o,,jA 4,g r^ Its: ~'c f'YI,9NAro~R 2 #428015 Q - ranno - Dedication Decd Exhibit A Legal Description APRIL 23, 2003 LEGAL DESCRIPTION GREENWAY DEDICATION A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 2, "EDGEWOOD" IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 2, NORTH 87° 40' 08" WEST, 376.01 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE, NORTH 16° 46' 32" WEST, 88.02 FEET; THENCE NORTH 13° 13' 37' EAST, 52.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 160 46' 32" WEST, 48.66 FEET; THENCE NORTH 131 13' 37' EAST, 63.62 FEET; THENCE NORTH 33° D4126" WEST, 73.82 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION TO TEE CPTY OF TIGARD PER DEED DOCUMENT NO..4003073 77C) ; THENCE ALONG 'SAID SOUTH LINE, ON THE ARC OF A 510.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, BEING NON-TANGENT TO PREVIOUS CURVE AND CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 60 18'20", 56.13 FEET (CHORD BEARS NORTH 74° 04'40" EAST, 56.10 FEET); THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DEED BOOK 976, PAGE 360, SOUTH 87° 39' 27" EAST, 160.91 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 77° 09' 30" EAST, 54.56 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87° 39' 2T' EAST, 176.72 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE EAST TINE OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTH LINE, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, SOUTH 02° 52' 01" WEST, 310.52 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING APPRO)MVIATELY 127,742 SQUARE FEET, OR 2.93 ACRES. THE BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS DESCRIPTION IS SURVEY NO. 29,1671 WASHINGTON COUNTY SURVEY RECORDS. Exhibit B Depiction of Property A-_06'18'20' R-510.00' L=56.13' ' CB=N74*04'40"E, LOT 1 N.E. CORNER LOT 2. 56.10' 'EDGEWOOD'\ S 87'39'27. E_S 77 09,3 p sr39'27 _E _ 846.68'___ BOOK 141, PAGE 509 160.91' S4., E S 8739'27° E 176.72' PROPOSED 8' c y ~ WIDE P.U.E. SEWER EASEMENT TO UNIFIED SEWERAGE - - - - H W .0 AGENCY PER RECORDER'S FEE NO. 94057897 04 Z Lo Mwo g 0 Z cpd'; U O) W O = O~ N= O LLIp 04 X_ U) Z !z in OW Z N O z cn PAINT OF BEGINNING LOT ST LINE S.E CORNER LOT 2 \ ~L EDGEWOOD" N 87'40'08° W 376.01' LOT 3 DEED DOCUMENT LOSOU T Z LINE NO. 94114886 ° SCALE: 80' SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN A PORTION OF LOT 2, "EDGEWOOD" IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE- QUARTER OF SECTION 1 AND THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 2, g TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 1 WEST, OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, CITY OF TIGARD, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON DRAWN BY- F?Lm DATE: E REVIEWED 6Y: MRG DATE- 4/2t /03 - : , s j PROJECT NO.: 328-011 ALMIA Ci• lwC. ° SC I Ff 1. s 40' PL► MM e.DETUMIU lI Sl W== BaRTZYM On= 60.1-402-40003-tAL 509-4'W-WU 'eia+ t~Er1 .z&M i5- AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF December-16,2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Appoint Robert Canselosi to the Tree Board Jim Brav as first alternate and Colin Penno as second alternate to the Tree Board PREPARED BY: Susan Koe in DEPT HEAD OK Lam---- CITY MGR OK ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Appoint a Tree Board member and two alternates. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution to appoint Robert Cancelosi to the Tree Board, Jim as first alternate and Collin Penno as second alternate to the Tree Board. INFORMATION SUMMARY Robert Cancelosi is appointed to a four-year term on the Tree Board. Mr. Bray is appointed as the first alternate and Mr. Penno as the second alternate. Mr. Bray and Mr. Penno will serve as alternates until their terms expire or they are appointed to fill a mid-term vacancy on the Tree Board. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED Delay action VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Goal: City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community. ATTACHMENT LIST Biographical information FISCAL NOTES none Biographical information on Tree Board appointees December 16, 2003 Robert Cancelosi lives on the west side of Tigard and has resided in Tigard for two years. He received his bachelor's degree at Portland State University. He owns a business in Portland and has volunteered in local private schools. Jim Bray has lived in Tigard for 35 years and resides not far from the John Tigard House. He worked for the Portland Park Bureau including the Hoyt Arboretum. He continues to actively participate in tree planting projects in this area as a volunteer. Colin Penno lives near Tigard High School and has resided in Tigard for six years. He Graduated from college in London, UK and moved to Tigard from Los Angeles County California. He is employed as an interior landscaper at Washington Square Mall. a~ AGENDA ITEM # FOR AGENDA OF December 6, 2003 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY ISSUE/AGENDA TITLE Appointments to the Planning Commission PREPARED BY: Susan Koepping_fil~/1 f DEPT HEAD OK ITY MGR O ISSUE BEFORE THE COUNCIL Appointments to the Planning Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution to reappoint Mark Padgett to a position on the Planning Commission, appoint Rex Caffall to a position on the Planning Commission, and appoint Katherine Meads as an alternate to the Planning Commission. INFORMATION SUMMARY This term is the third consecutive term for Mr. Padgett. He is eligible for a third term because he was appointed to his initial term on September 12, 1995, before term limits for Planning Commission became effective on January 1, 1996. This will be Mr. Padgett's final consecutive term under term limits. Mr. Caffall has served as the alternate to the Planning Commission and, with this recommended appointment, will serve an initial term on the Planning Commission. Ms. Meads will serve as alternate to the Planning Commission. OTHER ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED None considered. VISION TASK FORCE GOAL AND ACTION COMMITTEE STRATEGY Goal: City will maximize the effectiveness of the volunteer spirit to accomplish the greatest good for our community. ATTACHMENT LIST Biographical information on Mark Padgett, Rex Caffall and Katherine Meads. FISCAL NOTES None Ell Biographical information on Planning Commission Appointees December 16, 2003 Mark Padgett owns a business in Tigard, and resides in northwest Tigard. Mr. Padgett has lived in Tigard for 22 years, and has been actively involved in the community through sports, schools, and various city and county committees. Rex Caffall lives in the center of Tigard and has been a resident of Tigard for 12 years. He attended high school in Portland and received his higher education in Virginia. Having formerly owned Caffall Brothers Forest Products, he is now employed at Caro USA. Mr. Caffall has been an instructor for the Red Cross, a scoutmaster, and a soccer coach. Katherine Meads has resided in the northeast section of Tigard and has resided here for nearly ten years. She attended public schools in Portland, and also attended Lewis and Clark and the University of Oregon. She is a senior designer with an engineering firm. She has been actively involved in the community, and is currently a member of the Tualatin Valley Community Band. 1:1ADMISUSANK\TASKFORCITASKFORCE 1\PLANN COMMISOOS PADGETTCAFFALLMEADS.DOC 1 L-GUIDILI I T .1I Kit' 2003 CITY COUNCIL. ATTENDANCE and MEETING TIME DATE 1/6 1/14 1/21 1/28 2/11 2/18 2125 3111 3/18 3125 418 4/15 4/22 5/13 5120 5/27 6/10 6117 6/24 7/8 7/15 ATTENDANCE Griffith x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Dirksen x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Moore x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Sherwood x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Wilson x X X X X X X X 02 TIME Called to Order 12:27 7:30 6:31 6:31 6:30 6:36 6:30 6:36:30 6:30 6:30 6:30 6:30 6:33 6:30 6:33 630 6:31 6:31 6:30 Adjoumed 5:30 8:20 10:09 8:16 8:53 9:52 9:59 10:18:43 9:13 10:02 9:27 9:36 9:27 9:32 10:45 8:13 8:40 10:56 9:43 Meeting Length 5:03 0:50 3:38 1:45 2:22 3:16 3:29 3:42:13 2:43 3:32 2:57 3:06 2:54 3:02 412 143 209 427 3:13 Converted to Minutes 303 50 218 105 142 196 209 22133 163 212 177 186 174 182 252 103 129 267 193 DATE 7/22 8/5 8/12 8/19 8/26 8129 919 9/16 9/23 10/7 10/14 10121 10/28 1114 11118 11/25 12/2 12/16 ATTENDANCE Griffith x X X NO X X X X X X X X ' Dirksen x X X MTG X X X X X X X X X X X X X Muore x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Sherwood x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Wilson x X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X TIME Called to Order 6:30 2:15 6:30 6:36 6:15 5:33 6:00 6:31 6:11 6:30 6:30 6:32 6:32 6:30 6:32 6:30 6:28 Adjoumed 11:22 5:45 11:15 10:50 8:15 12:02 9:16 9:37 7:29 9:18 9:37 8:47 8:46 10:50 10:16 10:18 9:58 Meeting Length 4:52 3:30 4:451 1 4:14 2:00 6:29 3:16 3:06 1:18 2:48 3:07 2:15 2:14 4:20 3:44 3:48 3:30 Converted to minutes 292 150 2851 1 254 120 389 196 186 78 168 187 135 134 260 404 228 210 Total Minutes: 7001 ' Mayor Griffith deceased 11/28103 Number of Meetings: 38 Average Meeting Time: 184.24 p t4--,I 7mll I:IRec/Joanne12003 CC Altndnce Time